Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 349

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The reported benefits of telehealth for rural Australians

Moffatt, Jennifer J., Eley, Diann S.·2010·Australian Health Review

Abstract

Objective. A literature review was conducted to identify the reported benefits attributed to telehealth for people living and professionals working in rural and remote areas of Australia. Data sources. Scopus and relevant journals and websites were searched using the terms: telemedicine, telehealth, telepsychiatry, teledermatology, teleradiology, Australia, and each state and territory. Publications since 1998 were included. Study selection. The initial search resulted in 176 articles, which was reduced to 143 when research reporting on Australian rural, regional or remote populations was selected. Data synthesis. A narrative review was conducted using an existing ‘benefits’ framework. Patients are reported to have benefited from: lower costs and reduced inconvenience while accessing specialist health services; improved access to services and improved quality of clinical services. Health professionals are reported to have benefited from: access to continuing education and professional development; provision of enhanced local services; experiential learning, networking and collaboration. Discussion. Rural Australians have reportedly benefited from telehealth. The reported improved access and quality of clinical care available to rural Australians through telemedicine and telehealth may contribute to decreasing the urban–rural health disparities. The reported professional development opportunities and support from specialists through the use of telehealth may contribute to improved rural medical workforce recruitment and retention. What is known about the topic? An extensive international literature has reported on the efficacy of telehealth, and to a lesser extent the clinical outcomes and cost-effectiveness of telemedicine. Systematic reviews conclude that the quality of the studies preclude definitive conclusions being drawn about clinical and cost-effectiveness, although there is some evidence of effective clinical outcomes and the potential for cost-benefits. Little attention has been paid to the benefits reported for people who live in rural and remote Australia, despite this being a rationale for the use of telehealth in rural and remote locations. What does this paper add? Patients in rural and remote locations in Australia are reported to benefit from telehealth by increased access to health services and up-skilled health professionals. Health professionals are reported to benefit from telehealth by up-skilling from increased contact with specialists and increased access to professional development. The review findings suggest that one strategy, the increased use of telehealth, has the potential to reduce the inequitable access to health services and the poorer health status that many rural Australians experience, and contribute to addressing the on-going problem of the recruitment and retention of the rural health workforce. What are the implications for practitioners? The use of telehealth appears to be a path to up-skilling for rural and remote practitioners.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1071/ah09794

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 1 references

Cited by

See all 349

Metadata

Authors
Moffatt, J. J., & Eley, D. S.
Venue
Australian Health Review
Published
2010-08-25
Volume
34
Issue
3
Pages
276-281
ISSN
  • 0156-5788 (ISSN-L)
  • 1449-8944
OpenAlex
W1993399274
Cited by
349
References
1
FWCI
8.95
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The reported benefits of telehealth for rural Australians. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1071/ah09794
The paper
Moffatt, J. J., & Eley, D. S. (2010). The reported benefits of telehealth for rural Australians. Australian Health Review. https://doi.org/10.1071/ah09794

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.