Cited by 47Telemedicine and Telehealth ImplementationHealthcare Systems and TechnologyDigital Imaging in Medicine

Pediatric Teledermatology: A Survey of Usage, Perspectives, and Practice

Fogel, Alexander L., Teng, Joyce M. C.·2015·Pediatric Dermatology

Abstract

Pediatric dermatology is one of the smallest subspecialties, and expanding the availability of care is of great interest. Teledermatology has been proposed as a way to expand access and improve care delivery, but no current assessment of pediatric teledermatology exists. The objective of the current study was to assess usage and perspectives on pediatric teledermatology. Surveys were distributed electronically to all 226 board‐certified U.S. pediatric dermatologists; 44% (100/226) responded. Nearly all respondents (89%) have experience with teledermatology. Formal teledermatology reimbursement success rates have increased to 35%. Respondents were positive about teledermatology's present and future prospects, and 41% want to use teledermatology more often, although they viewed teledermatology as somewhat inferior to in‐person care regarding accuracy of diagnosis and appropriation of management plans. Significant differences were found between formal teledermatology users and nonusers in salary structure, practice environment, sex, and region. Substantial increases in pediatric teledermatology have occurred in the last 5 to 10 years, and there remains cause for optimism for teledermatology's future. Concerns about diagnostic confidence and care quality indicate that teledermatology may be best for care of patients with characteristic clinical presentations or management of patients with established diagnoses.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/pde.12533

Cites

9 of 9 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, 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

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Fogel, A. L., & Teng, J. M. C.
Affiliations
Stanford University (US)
Corresponding author
Teng, Joyce M. C.
Venue
Pediatric Dermatology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2015-02-18
Volume
32
Issue
3
Pages
363-368
ISSN
  • 0736-8046 (ISSN-L)
  • 1525-1470
OpenAlex
W2164030177
Cited by
47
References
9
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 3
FWCI
4.29
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Pediatric Dermatology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Telemedicine and Telehealth Implementation
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Healthcare Systems and Technology
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Digital Imaging in Medicine
Keywords
telemedicine, health care access, physician attitudes, reimbursement, diagnostic accuracy, quality of care, physician characteristics, telehealth adoption
MeSH terms
Dermatology, Humans, Surveys and Questionnaires, Reimbursement Mechanisms, United States, Telemedicine, Videoconferencing

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