A systematic review of the use of telehealth to facilitate a diagnosis for children with developmental concerns.
Chelsea La Valle, Emily Johnston, Helen Tager-Flusberg
PMID 35636261WHAT IT FOUND
Telehealth diagnostic assessments for children with developmental concerns showed high accuracy, feasibility, and satisfaction in nine studies.
Most evidence was fair quality, with few studies testing accuracy directly. Families and providers accepted the method, but more rigorous research is needed.
Key findings
01Only two of the nine included studies reported on diagnostic accuracy, finding high agreement between telehealth and face-to-face diagnoses.
02Families and providers reported high levels of feasibility and acceptability, though some providers noted technical issues and a preference for face-to-face interaction.
03Methodological quality was generally low, with only one of the nine studies rated as good quality.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for SLPs
Read the rest of this summary
You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.
What it does not show
Only two studies reported on diagnostic accuracy. Eight of the nine studies were rated as fair quality, not good. Sample sizes in the included studies were small. The review excluded children with ASD, limiting generalizability to that common population. Few studies reported on socioeconomic status or race, so it is unclear if telehealth bridges disparities. Most studies were conducted in clinics/hospitals, not homes, so results may not apply to home-based telehealth.
Declared interests
None declared.
The easy way to misread this
Do not assume telehealth diagnoses are equivalent to in-person ones based on this review. Only two of the nine studies actually tested diagnostic accuracy, and the overall evidence quality was low.