An editor's view of telemedicine.
Should an editor hold a view about telemedicine, or should an editor be entirely disinterested? The editorial role has been defined by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors and a long list of editorial responsibilities has been set out by the World Association of Medical Editors. This represents something of a counsel of perfection, although clearly an editor should not have a personal view, in the sense of promoting telemedicine or dismissing it. Since telemedicine editors are almost bound to be active in research, they should take particular care with manuscripts involving their own work, for example standing aside from the editorial process and delegating editorial decisions to other members of the editorial staff. At the beginning of the 1990s, there were few publications about telemedicine in the peer-reviewed literature. The subsequent years have seen a rapid growth in numbers of articles and the emergence of two specialist journals. These are all healthy signs. However, there have been remarkably few studies of telemedicine's cost-effectiveness, which must represent a sign of its immaturity. On balance, the evidence seems to indicate that telemedicine research is in a healthy state.
Wootton
Richard
R
Centre for Online Health, University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia. r_wootton@pobox.com
D015706:Bibliometrics; D010506:Periodicals as Topic / Q000592:standards / Q000639:trends; D017594:Publication Bias; D011643:Publishing; D012106:Research; D017216:Telemedicine / Q000639:trends