Trends in telehealth use among a cohort of rural patients during the COVID-19 pandemic
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: Rural populations faced unique challenges to healthcare access during the COVID-19 pandemic. This analysis assesses trends in digital health technology use at the onset of the pandemic and describes digital health behaviors among a cohort of patients within a rural integrated healthcare network throughout the first 3 years of the pandemic. Methods: We used data from both the electronic health record (EHR) and a patient survey. EHR data was used to longitudinally assess change over time in patient portal use and telehealth visits. Survey responses were used to provide additional context. Results: Telehealth appointments peaked in the first quarter of 2020 at 28% of all office visits, before leveling off to 8-10% in 2022. Women and those younger than 65 were more likely to have participated in telehealth appointments. Active patient portal users increased from 34.1% in January 2019 to 63.7% in January 2022. There were no differences noted in portal use trends based on rurality. Conclusions: Our findings corroborate previous research, as well as add context regarding digital health technology use throughout the COVID pandemic in a rural patient population. Future research must focus on understanding constraints to digital health expansion in order to continue providing safe, equitable care.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it