Cited by 22Telemedicine and Telehealth ImplementationTechnology Use by Older AdultsTechnology and Human Factors in Education and Health

Technical aspects of clinical videoconferencing: a large scale review of the literature

Fatehi, Farhad, Armfield, Nigel R, Dimitrijevic, Mila, Gray, Leonard C·2015·Journal of Telemedicine and Telecare

Abstract

Summary Telemedicine has been increasingly researched during the past few decades and the technology used by health care providers and recipients has changed dramatically. However, little has been published on technical characteristics of video consultations and how these characteristics have changed over time due to rapid advancement of information and communication technology. We aimed to summarize various types of technologies used for interactive videoconferencing between health care providers and patients, and identify the trend of their change from 2002 to 2012. A comprehensive electronic search was performed using PubMed, Embase and CINAHL databases which yielded 2,411 unique records. After screening at title/abstract level, full texts of 505 articles were retrieved and explored for technical information of videoconferencing. The trend of number of publications fluctuated between 41 and 47 articles with no specific pattern, though a dip in 2004 (n = 35) and drastic increase in 2012 (n = 68) was evident. The equipment used for videoconferencing was not mentioned in 15% of the papers. Dedicated VC systems (CODECs), were the most commonly used hardware, followed by computer/laptop/notebook. The connection speed (bandwidth) was not reported in 46% of the papers. The proportion of articles reporting the connection speed declined over time. Details of image quality and frame rate were mentioned in 11% and 5% of the papers, respectively. The results of this study showed that a high proportion of telemedicine papers lack sufficient technical details that limits their repeatability and generalizability.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/1357633x15571999

Cites

16 of 16 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

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Fatehi, F., Armfield, N. R., Dimitrijevic, M., & Gray, L. C.
Affiliations
  • The University of Queensland (AU)
  • Centre for Online Health, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia
Corresponding author
Fatehi, Farhad
Venue
Journal of Telemedicine and Telecare
Published
2015-02-19
Volume
21
Issue
3
Pages
160-166
ISSN
  • 1357-633X (ISSN-L)
  • 1758-1109
OpenAlex
W1972023205
Cited by
22
References
16
Citations by year
2025: 2 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 4 · 2015: 1
FWCI
2.86
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Telemedicine and Telecare (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Telemedicine and Telehealth Implementation
  • Social Sciences › Demography › Technology Use by Older Adults
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Technology and Human Factors in Education and Health
Keywords
videoconferencing, telemedicine, video consultation, technological properties, codecs, bandwidth, image quality, frame rate, information and communication technologies, healthcare provider-patient communication
MeSH terms
Delivery of Health Care, Humans, Remote Consultation, 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