Relationship between the Quality of Service Provided through Store-and-Forward Telemedicine Consultations and the Difficulty of the Cases – Implications for Long-Term Quality Assurance
We examined the difficulty of telemedicine cases and the quality of the resultant consultation in a mature store-and-forward telemedicine network. A random sample of 10 telemedicine cases was selected from those occurring over a 3-month period (5% of the workload) and they were scored by three experienced observers. Inter-observer agreement on the difficulty scores was poor (Fleiss's kappa = 0.18) and it was also poor on the consultation quality scores (Fleiss's kappa = 0.11). Differences between observers were minimized by consensus scoring, and the cases were re-assessed jointly by two observers. Based on the consensus scores, there was a weak negative relation between output quality and case difficulty, i.e., the more difficult cases tended to result in lower quality consultations. However, the effect was non-significant (P = 0.59) and a larger study might be helpful. In the meantime, routine monitoring of telemedicine service quality will continue in the interests of quality assurance. As yet, there is no evidence on which to base a correction for case difficulty.
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 09 October 2015.
All research outputs
#13,214,454
of 22,829,083 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Public Health
#2,864
of 9,866 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#126,083
of 274,965 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Public Health
#22
of 54 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,829,083 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 9,866 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 274,965 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 54 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 59% of its contemporaries.
