MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4413026915 · doi:10.2196/74167

Exploring the Preferences and Behavioral Trends of e-Patients in Psychosomatics Towards Telemedicine During and Post COVID-19 Pandemic: Cross-Sectional Analysis

2025· article· en· W4413026915 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Moritz Mahling, Alex McQueeney, Teresa Festl‐Wietek, Ken Masters, Stephan Zipfel, Anne Herrmann‐Werner, Caroline Rometsch

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Formative Research · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTelemedicine and Telehealth Implementation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)PandemicTelemedicine2019-20 coronavirus outbreakSevere acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)PreprintPsychosomaticsCross-sectional studyMedicinePsychologyMedical emergencyPsychiatryHealth careVirologyPathologyComputer scienceWorld Wide WebDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: COVID-19 accelerated the adoption of health services, with a growing number of psychosomatic patients turning to the internet for health-related decisions. This study explored changes in communication behavior, information-seeking habits, and post-pandemic consultation preferences among psychosomatic patients during and after COVID-19. Objective: This study explored changes in communication behavior, information-seeking habits, and post-pandemic consultation preferences among psychosomatic patients during and after COVID-19. Methods: In a cross-sectional study, 150 adult patients (>18 y) from the psychosomatic outpatient department in Tübingen, Germany, were invited to complete an ad hoc questionnaire to identify e-patients' preferences related to communication, information-seeking behavior, subjective explanations, and postpandemic preferences. Group comparisons and multiple linear regression analyses were conducted. Results: The study revealed a slight increase in online-based communication between patients and caregivers (eg, caregivers' system use +10.8%; live video consultations +30.8%), as well as in patient-patient interactions (eg, online correspondence +16.9%). Significant group differences were observed for social media correspondence by patient age (χ2¬=17.44, P<.001) and for live video consultations by gender (χ2¬=70.17, P<.001). For both age and gender, significant group differences were found in the use of medical videos (age χ2¬=6.36, P=.04; gender χ2¬=76.70, P<.001). Age, gender, and preferences for live video consultations were identified as significant predictors (F1,11=14.195, P<.001, R²=0.299) of patients' future preferences for on-site versus online consultations. Conclusions: Although a slight increase in online-based communication was observed, resilience in patient-caregiver and patient-patient communication indicated relative stability under challenging circumstances. Older adults and female patients expressed a preference for on-site consultations, emphasizing the significance of in-person care. Male patients demonstrated greater openness towards online consultations, indicating potential for expansion of eHealth services. Identifying preferences is a core essential for providing future eHealth implementations that account for diverse patient needs and for designing care offerings. Incorporating these findings may enhance patient engagement and satisfaction in the evolving landscape of eHealth services for better health care outcomes.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.281
GPT teacher head0.542
Teacher spread0.262 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Formative Research→Same topicTelemedicine and Telehealth Implementation→French-language works237,207→