Cited by 80Telemedicine and Telehealth ImplementationTechnology Use by Older AdultsHealthcare Systems and Technology

An overview of the effect of telehealth on mortality: A systematic review of meta-analyses

Snoswell, Centaine L, Stringer, Hannah, Taylor, Monica L, Caffery, Liam J, Smith, Anthony C·2023·Journal of Telemedicine and Telecare

Abstract

Introduction: Telehealth is recognised as a viable way of providing health care over distance, and an effective way to increase access for individuals with transport difficulties or those living in rural and remote areas. While telehealth has many positives for patients, clinicians and the health system, it is important that changes in the delivery of health care (e.g. in-person to telehealth) do not result in inferior or unsafe care. In this review, we collate existing meta-analyses of mortality rates to provide a holistic view of the current evidence regarding telehealth safety. Methods: In November 2020, a search of Pretty Darn Quick Evidence portal was conducted in order to locate systematic reviews published between 2010 and 2019, examining and meta-analysing the effect of telehealth interventions on mortality compared to usual care. Results: This review summarises evidence from 24 meta-analyses. Five overarching medical disciplines were represented (cardiovascular, neurology, pulmonary, obstetrics and intensive care). Overall, telehealth did not increase mortality rates. Discussion: The evidence from this review can be used by decision makers, in conjunction with other disease-specific and health economic evidences, to support and guide telehealth implementation plans.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/1357633x211023700

Cites

38 of 38 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

1 of the 39 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Snoswell, C. L., Stringer, H., Taylor, M. L., Caffery, L. J., & Smith, A. C.
Affiliations
The University of Queensland (AU)
Corresponding author
Snoswell, Centaine L
Venue
Journal of Telemedicine and Telecare
Published
2021-06-29
Volume
29
Issue
9
Pages
659-668
ISSN
  • 1357-633X (ISSN-L)
  • 1758-1109
OpenAlex
W3174025691
Cited by
80
References
39
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 14 · 2023: 24 · 2022: 22 · 2021: 10
FWCI
3.12
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Telemedicine and Telecare (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • University of Southern Denmark Research Portal (University of Southern Denmark) (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Telemedicine and Telehealth Implementation
  • Social Sciences › Demography › Technology Use by Older Adults
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Healthcare Systems and Technology
Keywords
telemedicine, mortality, remote healthcare delivery, health care access, cardiovascular care, neurology, respiratory care, obstetrics, intensive care, telehealth implementation
MeSH terms
Delivery of Health Care, Humans, 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