Application of telemedicine during the coronavirus disease epidemics: a rapid review and meta-analysis

  1. on behalf of COVID-19 Evidence and Recommendations Working Group
  2. Yelei Gao
  3. Rui Liu
  4. Qi Zhou
  5. Xingmei Wang
  6. Liping Huang
  7. Qianling Shi
  8. Zijun Wang
  9. Shuya Lu
  10. Weiguo Li
  11. Yanfang Ma
  12. Xufei Luo
  13. Toshio Fukuoka
  14. Hyeong Sik Ahn
  15. Myeong Soo Lee
  16. Zhengxiu Luo
  17. Enmei Liu
  18. Yaolong Chen
  19. Chang Shu
  20. Daiyin Tian

Reviewed by

Read the full article See related articles

Listed in

Log in to save this article

Abstract

No abstract available

Article activity feed

  1. ScreenIT

    SciScore for 10.1101/2020.04.14.20065664: (What is this?)

    Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.

    Table 1: Rigor

    Institutional Review Board Statementnot detected.
    Randomizationnot detected.
    Blindingnot detected.
    Power Analysisnot detected.
    Sex as a biological variablenot detected.

    Table 2: Resources

    Software and Algorithms
    SentencesResources
    Search strategy: A comprehensive search was performed by an experienced librarian in the following electronic databases from their inception to March 31st, 2020(14): the Cochrane library, MEDLINE (via PubMed), EMBASE, Web of Science, CBM (China Biology Medicine disc), CNKI (China National Knowledge Infrastructure), and Wanfang Data.
    Cochrane library
    suggested: (Cochrane Library, RRID:SCR_013000)
    MEDLINE
    suggested: (MEDLINE, RRID:SCR_002185)
    PubMed
    suggested: (PubMed, RRID:SCR_004846)
    EMBASE
    suggested: (EMBASE, RRID:SCR_001650)
    We also searched clinical trial registry platforms (the World Health Organization Clinical Trials Registry Platform (http://www.who.int/ictrp/en/), US National Institutes of Health Trials Register (https://clinicaltrials.gov/)), Google Scholar (https://scholar.google.nl/), preprint platforms (bioRxiv(https://www.biorxiv.org/),medRxiv(https://www.medrxiv.org/), SSRN (https://www.ssrn.com/index.cfm/en/)) and reference lists of the identified reviews to find unpublished and other potentially relevant studies.
    Google Scholar
    suggested: (Google Scholar, RRID:SCR_008878)
    The bibliographic software EndNote was used and any discrepancies were settled by discussion, consulting a third reviewer (Q Zhou) if necessary.
    EndNote
    suggested: (EndNote, RRID:SCR_014001)
    The included studies were evaluated using appropriate assessment scales depending on the study type: for RCTs, the Cochrane Risk-of-Bias assessment tool, for cohort studies, the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS)(17,18), and for cross-sectional studies, the methodology evaluation tool recommended by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ)(19).
    Cochrane Risk-of-Bias
    suggested: None
    All analyses were performed in STATA version 14.
    STATA
    suggested: (Stata, RRID:SCR_012763)

    Results from OddPub: We did not detect open data. We also did not detect open code. Researchers are encouraged to share open data when possible (see Nature blog).

    Results from LimitationRecognizer: We detected the following sentences addressing limitations in the study:
    Strengths and limitations: This study is to our knowledge the first systematic and comprehensive exposition of telemedicine consultation during the COVID-19, SARS and MERS epidemics. Our study had however several limitations. We found no original studies comparing telemedicine with traditional medical services in the prevention and control of COVID-19. We also did not find any studies about telemedicine use during the MERS outbreak. In the future, more research is needed to evaluate the role of telemedicine in acute infectious diseases. It is also necessary to establish a reliable telemedicine service system as soon as possible after an outbreak of an infectious disease, to help distinguish the patients with the emerging infection from other patients.

    Results from TrialIdentifier: No clinical trial numbers were referenced.

    Results from Barzooka: We did not find any issues relating to the usage of bar graphs.

    Results from JetFighter: We did not find any issues relating to colormaps.

    Results from rtransparent:
    • Thank you for including a conflict of interest statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
    • Thank you for including a funding statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
    • No protocol registration statement was detected.

    About SciScore

    SciScore is an automated tool that is designed to assist expert reviewers by finding and presenting formulaic information scattered throughout a paper in a standard, easy to digest format. SciScore checks for the presence and correctness of RRIDs (research resource identifiers), and for rigor criteria such as sex and investigator blinding. For details on the theoretical underpinning of rigor criteria and the tools shown here, including references cited, please follow this link.

  2. Version published to 10.21037/atm-20-3315
  3. Version published to 10.1101/2020.04.14.20065664v1 on medRxiv