Patient Preferences for Direct-to-Consumer Telemedicine Services: Replication and Extension of a Nationwide Survey
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: A 2017 survey of patient perspectives showed overall willingness and comfort to use telemedicine, but low actual use. Given recent growth and widespread exposure of patients to telemedicine, patient preferences are likely to have changed. Objective: This study aimed to (1) identify demographic trends in patient preferences and experiences; (2) measure ease of use and satisfaction of telemedicine; and (3) measure changes in telemedicine use, willingness, and comfort since 2017. Methods: We replicated a 2017 study with a nationwide survey of US adults. The survey, an extended version of the previous study, measured patient health care access as well as knowledge, experiences, and preferences regarding telemedicine encounters. We recruited participants using SurveyMonkey Audience in July 2022. We used descriptive statistics and generalized estimating equations to measure change and identify trends. Results: We accrued 4577 complete responses. Patient experience with telemedicine was substantially higher in 2022 than in 2017, with 61.1% (vs 5.3%) of participants aware that their primary care provider offered telemedicine and 34.5% (vs 3.5%) reporting use of telemedicine with their primary care provider. This study also reported ease of use and satisfaction rates to be similar to in-person visits, while overall willingness and comfort in using telemedicine increased from 2017. Individuals at the poverty line were significantly less likely to report satisfaction with telemedicine visits. We found increased interpersonal distance in a patient and health care professional relationship significantly reduced patient ease of use, willingness, and comfort in using telemedicine. Conclusions: This study identified an association between income and patient satisfaction, conveying the importance of understanding telemedicine in relation to health care access and equity. Telemedicine ease of use and satisfaction were comparable to in-person visits. Individuals reported greater use and higher positive perceptions of telemedicine willingness and comfort since 2017.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".