Erratum Table 2.

Randomized, controlled trials involving video based physician visits with patients in clinical environments (N = 11)

Study	Year	Sample size	Study population	Intervention(s)	Duration	Primary outcomes	Results
Fortney JC et al. [8]	2013	364	Individuals with depression	Randomized to practice-based or telemedicine-base collaborative care	18 months	• Clinical	• Telemedicine-based collaborative care yielded better outcomes for depressed patients
Moreno FA et al. [9]	2012	167	Hispanic adults with depression	Randomized to telemedicine care from a psychiatrist or usual care from a primary care physician	6 months	• Clinical	• All participants improved on clinical measures
						• Quality of life	• Time to improvement was shorter in telemedicine group
Ferrer-Roca O et al. [7]	2010	800	Primary care patients referred for specialized care	Randomized to face-to-face hospital referral or telemedicine from specialist	6 months	• Quality of life	• Telemedicine care was comparable to face-to-face care
							• Diagnosis and examination to start treatment were faster in the telemedicine group
Stahl JE, Dixon RF [12]	2010	175	Patients in a general primary care practice	Interviewed face-to-face and via videoconferencing, order randomized	2 visits	• Satisfaction	• Patients and providers were highly satisfied with videoconferencing but preferred face-to-face
						• Willingness to pay	• Technical quality of video calls had significant impact on satisfaction
Dorsey ER et al. [6]	2010	14	Individuals with Parkinson disease	Randomized to usual care or care via telemedicine	6 months	• Feasibility	• Virtual house calls were feasible
							• Virtual house calls improved disease-specific measures significantly compared to usual care.
Dixon RF, Stahl JE [5]	2009	175	Patients in a general primary care practice	Randomized to one virtual visit and one face-to-face, or two face-to-face consultations	2 visits	• Diagnostic agreement	• Physicians and patients highly satisfied with virtual visits
						• Satisfaction	• Diagnostic agreement between virtual and in-person evaluation was similar to comparison of two in-person evaluations
Ahmed SN et al. [2]	2008	41	Epilepsy patients	Randomized to telemedicine follow up or conventional	1 visit	• Cost effectiveness	• 90 % of patients in both groups satisfied with quality of services
						• Cost to patients and caregivers	• Cost of telemedicine production was similar to patient savings
						• Satisfaction
O’Reilly R et al. [10]	2007	495	Patients referred for psychiatric consult	Randomized to face to face or telepsychiatry	4 months	• Clinical	• Similar outcomes were seen in both arms
						• Cost effectiveness	• Telepsychiatry was at least 10 % less expensive than in-person care
						• Satisfaction	• Both groups expressed similar satisfaction
De Las Cuevas C et al. [4]	2006	140	Psychiatric outpatients	Randomized to face-to-face or telepsychiatry	24 weeks	• Clinical	• Telepsychiatry had equivalent efficacy to face-to-face care
Ruskin PE et al. [11]	2004	119	Veterans with depression	Randomized to telepsychiatry or in-person psychiatrist visits	6 months	• Clinical	• Both groups were equivalent in clinical outcomes, cost, patient adherence, and patient satisfaction.
						• Cost effectiveness
						• Healthcare resource utilization
						• Satisfaction
Bishop JE et al. [3]	2002	17	Psychiatric patients	Randomized to videoconference or face-to-face	4 months	• Satisfaction	• Similar satisfaction observed in both groups