Cited by 16Telemedicine and Telehealth ImplementationHealth Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of LifeCOVID-19 and healthcare impacts

Recapitulating the Bayesian framework for neurosurgical outpatient care and a cost-benefit analysis of telemedicine for socioeconomically disadvantaged patients in the Philippines during the pandemic

Open access
Ferraris, Kevin Paul, Golidtum, Jared Paul, Zuñiga, Brian Karlo W., Bautista, Maria Cristina G., Alcazaren, Jose Carlos, Seng, Kenny, Navarro, Joseph Erroll·2020·Neurosurgical Focus

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: In the Philippines during recent months, a neurosurgical center that caters primarily to socioeconomically disadvantaged patients has encountered unprecedented changes in practice patterns brought about by the COVID-19 pandemic. In particular, the usual task of outpatient care has shifted to the telemedicine format, bringing along all of its attendant advantages and gargantuan challenges. The authors sought to determine the responsiveness of this telemedicine setup to the needs of their disadvantaged patients and explored the application of Bayesian inference to enhance the use of teleconsultation in daily clinical decision-making. METHODS: The authors used the following methods to assess the telemedicine setup used in a low-resource setting during the pandemic: 1) a cross-sectional survey of patients who participated in a medical consultation via telemedicine during the 16-week period from March 16, 2020, to July 15, 2020; 2) a cost-benefit analysis of the use of telemedicine by patients; and 3) a case illustration of a Bayesian approach application unique to the teleconsultation scenario. RESULTS: Of the 272 patient beneficiaries of telemedicine in a 16-week period, 57 responded to the survey. The survey responses regarding neurosurgical outpatient care through telemedicine yielded high ratings of utility for the patients and their caregivers. According to 64% of respondents, the affordability of the telemedicine setup also prevented them from borrowing money from others, among other adverse life events prevented. There were realized financial gains on the part of the patients in terms of cost savings and protection from further impoverishment. The benefit-cost ratio was 3.51 for the patients, signifying that the benefits outweighed the costs. An actual teleconsultation case vignette was reported that is meant to be instructive and contributory to the preparedness of the neurosurgeon on the provider end of the service delivery. CONCLUSIONS: Telemedicine holds promise as a viable and safe method for health service delivery during the pandemic. In the setting of a health system that is continually challenged by shortages of resources, this study shows that an effective telemedicine setup can come with high benefit-cost ratios and quality of care, along with the assurance of patient satisfaction. The potential for high-quality care can be enhanced by the inclusion of the Bayesian framework to the basic toolkit of remote clinical assessment. When confronted with choices in terms of differential diagnosis and tests, the rigor of a simple application of the Bayesian framework can minimize costs arising from uncertainties.

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 · 10.3171/2020.9.focus20695

Cites

39 of 39 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Ferraris, K. P., Golidtum, J. P., Zuñiga, B. K. W., Bautista, M. C. G., Alcazaren, J. C., Seng, K., & Navarro, J. E.
Affiliations
  • José R. Reyes Memorial Medical Center (PH)
  • Ateneo de Manila University (PH)
  • Philippine General Hospital (PH)
Venue
Neurosurgical Focus
Published
2020-12
Volume
49
Issue
6
Pages
E14
ISSN
1092-0684 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3107295310
Cited by
16
References
39
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 2 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 5
FWCI
1.87
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Neurosurgical FOCUS (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Telemedicine and Telehealth Implementation
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › COVID-19 and healthcare impacts
Keywords
telemedicine, teleconsultation, COVID-19 pandemic, Bayesian inference, clinical decision-making, cost-benefit analysis, resource-limited settings, patient satisfaction, differential diagnosis, Philippines, health care delivery, remote clinical assessment
MeSH terms
COVID-19, Adult, Ambulatory Surgical Procedures, Bayes Theorem, Child, Cost-Benefit Analysis, Cross-Sectional Studies, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Philippines, Surveys and Questionnaires, Social Class, Telemedicine, Neurosurgical Procedures, Vulnerable Populations

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