No abstract

We conducted a systematic review of 15 relevant databases for articles about telemedicine. After eliminating articles that did not meet the inclusion criteria, 1615 remained for analysis. Three raters coded the articles to assess various theoretical and methodological variables. Only 5% (n = 85) of the telemedicine articles made mention of any theory or paradigmatic approach. Studies commonly reported the objectives (96%) but rarely stated a research question or hypothesis (11%). Randomized selection of the subjects was reported in 11% of patient studies and 4% of studies where providers were the subject. There was a wide range in the number of subjects employed, although the majority of studies were based on sample sizes of less than 100. Only 26% of the studies reported a time frame. Until the telemedicine field adheres to agreed standards of reporting methodological details it will be difficult to draw firm conclusions from review studies.

No abstract