JMIR Publications

ABSTRACT

Background:

There are many reviews exploring telehealth and its application within healthcare; these reviews report inconsistencies with certain implementation data being reported, calling for a standardised deductive approach to telehealth research.

Objective:

This study evaluates the adherence of telehealth research to standardized reporting frameworks through a theory-based evaluation lens, using Cystic Fibrosis (CF) as a case exemplar.

Methods:

An updated systematic review was conducted in accordance with the PRISMA-ScR methodology to identify relevant manuscripts from the PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science databases. Only scientific manuscripts available in English were included. Conference abstracts and grey literature were excluded. Included manuscripts focused on the delivery of telehealth interventions to CF populations as part of or alongside routine CF care. Two relevant reporting checklists were identified in the Equator-Network database (iCHECK-DH and TIDiER-telehealth). Data were then extracted from the manuscripts in accordance with the checklists using Elicit.AI. Each checklist category was then described as being “Completely-Reported” (score=2), “Partially-Reported” (score=1), and “Did-Not-Report” (score=0) for each paper. An overall score was calculated for adherence to the checklists.

Results:

98 manuscripts were included in this review. The median score for iCHECK was 22/40 (range 11-29, 55% adherent) and 15/24 (range 6-23, 62.5% adherent) for TIDIER. For iCHECK, ≥50% of manuscripts Completely-Reported 6/20 categories, Partially-Reported 9/20 categories, and Did-Not-Report 3/20 categories. For TIDiER, ≥50% of manuscripts Completely-Reported 4/12 categories, Partially-Reported 6/12 categories, and Did-Not-Report 1/12 categories.

Conclusions:

Key areas like justification for telehealth, target populations, and outcomes are well documented, offering valuable insights into the rationale for and outcomes associated with telehealth. However, implementation processes remain under-reported, partly due to the more recent adoption of frameworks like TIDiER and iCHECK. The clinical implications of the current evidence limit the implementation of telehealth in terms of the ability to assess feasibility and readiness for adoption; understand financial implications and plan sustainably; ensure patient safety, data protection and equity; interpret outcome data in context; and to share, replicate, or scale evidence-based models of care. Strengthening the commitment to standardised telehealth reporting will ultimately support clinical decision making and improve the effective and equitable integration of telehealth into care.