Parent Perceptions of Telemedicine for Acute Pediatric Respiratory Tract Infections: Sequential Mixed Methods Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Since 2020, parents have had increasing opportunities to use telemedicine for their children, but how parents decide whether to use telemedicine for acute pediatric care relative to alternative sites of care is not clear. One of the most common reasons parents seek acute care for their children is for acute respiratory tract infections (ARTIs). OBJECTIVE: This study aims to examine parental expectations of care via telemedicine for pediatric ARTIs, contrasting expectations of care delivered via primary care telemedicine and direct-to-consumer (DTC) telemedicine. METHODS: We performed a sequential mixed methods analysis to examine how parents assess telemedicine for their children's acute care. We used ARTIs as a case study for examining parent perceptions of telemedicine. First, we analyzed semistructured interviews focused on parent responses about the use of telemedicine. Each factor discussed by parents was coded to reflect whether parents indicated it incentivized or disincentivized their preferences for telemedicine versus in-person care. Results were organized by a 7-dimension framework of parental health care seeking that was generated previously, which included dimensions related to care sites (expected access, affordability, clinical quality, and site quality) and dimensions related to child or family factors (perceived illness severity, perceived child susceptibility, and parent self-efficacy). Second, we analyzed responses to a national survey, which inquired about parental expectations of primary care telemedicine, commercial DTC telemedicine, and 3 in-person sites of care (primary care, urgent care, and emergency department) across 21 factors identified through prior qualitative work. To assess whether parents had different expectations of different telemedicine models, we compared survey responses for primary care telemedicine and commercial DTC telemedicine using weighted logistic regression. RESULTS: Interview participants (n=40) described factors affecting their perceptions of telemedicine as a care modality for pediatric ARTIs. Generally, factors aligned with access and affordability (eg, decreased wait time and lower out-of-pocket cost) were discussed as potential incentives for telemedicine use, while factors aligned with perceived illness severity, child susceptibility, and clinician quality (eg, trustworthiness) were discussed as potential disincentives for telemedicine use. In survey responses (n=1206), primary care and commercial DTC telemedicine were rated similarly on items related to expected accessibility and affordability. In contrast, on items related to expected quality of care, primary care telemedicine was viewed similarly to in-person primary care, while commercial DTC telemedicine was rated lower. For example, 69.7% (weighted; 842/1197) of respondents anticipated their children would be comfortable and cooperative with primary care telemedicine versus 49.7% (weighted; 584/1193) with commercial DTC telemedicine (P<.001). CONCLUSIONS: In a mixed methods analysis focused on telemedicine for ARTIs, parents expressed more concerns about telemedicine quality in commercial DTC models compared with primary care-based telemedicine. These results could help health systems better design telemedicine initiatives to support family-centered 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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.012 | 0.017 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".