Cited by 75Telemedicine and Telehealth ImplementationBurn Injury Management and OutcomesHealthcare Systems and Technology

A systematic review of the evidence for telemedicine in burn care: With a UK perspective

Wallace, D.L., Hussain, A., Khan, N., Wilson, Y.T.·2012·Burns

Abstract

A comprehensive systematic review of telemedicine in burn care was carried out. Studies published between 1993 and 2010 were included. The main outcome measures were the level of evidence, technical feasibility, clinical feasibility, clinical management and cost effectiveness. The search strategy yielded 24 studies, none of which were randomised. There were only five studies with a control group, and in three of these the patients act as their own controls. Four studies performed quantitative cost analysis, and five more provide qualitative cost analysis. All studies demonstrate technical and clinical feasibility. If the significant potentials of telemedicine to assist in the acute triage, management guidance and outpatient care are to be realised, then research needs to be undertaken to provide evidence for such investment.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.burns.2011.09.024

Cites

190 of 190 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 192 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Wallace, D. L., Hussain, A., Khan, N., & Wilson, Y. T.
Affiliations
  • Queen Elizabeth Hospital Birmingham (GB)
  • Wythenshawe Hospital (GB)
  • Birmingham Children's Hospital (GB)
Venue
Burns
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2012-06
Volume
38
Issue
4
Pages
465-480
ISSN
0305-4179 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1978102329
Cited by
75
References
192
Citations by year
2024: 2 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 9 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 8 · 2013: 2 · 2012: 4
FWCI
0.68
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Burns (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Telemedicine and Telehealth Implementation
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Burn Injury Management and Outcomes
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Healthcare Systems and Technology
Keywords
telemedicine, burn treatment, feasibility, cost-effectiveness, outpatient care, clinical management guidelines
MeSH terms
Burns, Cost-Benefit Analysis, Feasibility Studies, United Kingdom, Humans, Outcome Assessment, Health Care, Telemedicine

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review