Evidence map›Paper›PMID 18095039›Full record

ArticleJournal of general internal medicine2008

Interest in the use of computerized patient portals: role of the provider-patient relationship.

Susan L Zickmund, Rachel Hess, Cindy L Bryce, Kathleen McTigue, Ellen Olshansky, Katharine Fitzgerald, Gary S Fischer

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of general internal medicine, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 42 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
42citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
9.1field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

42 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 133 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. eHealth patient-provider communication in the United States: interest, inequalities, and predictors.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2017
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Susan L ZickmundCenter for Health Equity Research and Promotion, VA Pittsburgh Healthcare System, 151C-U, University Drive C, Pittsburgh, PA 15240, USA. Susan.Zickmund@med.va.gov
Rachel Hess
Cindy L Bryce
Kathleen McTigue
Ellen Olshansky
Katharine Fitzgerald
Gary S Fischer
University of Pittsburgh · USIrvine University · USVA Pittsburgh Healthcare System · US

Funding

University of Pittsburgh Clinical and Translational Science InstituteUL1TR000005 · NCATS · UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH AT PITTSBURGH · PI REIS, STEVEN E · 2012 to 2015
$50.8M
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR000005
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundBioinformatics experts are developing interactive patient portals to help those living with diabetes and other chronic diseases to better manage their conditions. However, little is known about what influences patients' desires to use this technology.

objectiveTo discern the impact of the provider-patient relationship on interest in using a web-based patient portal.

designQualitative analysis of focus groups.

participantsTen focus groups involving 39 patients (range 2-7) recruited from four primary care practices. APPROACH: A qualitative approach was used, which involved reading transcribed texts until a consensus was reached on data interpretation. An intercoder reliability kappa score (0.89) was determined by comparing the provider-patient relationship talk selected by the two coders. A conceptual framework was developed, which involved the development and refinement of a codebook and the application of it to the transcripts.

resultsInterest in the portal was linked to dissatisfaction with the provider-patient relationship, including dissatisfaction with provider communication/responsiveness, the inability to obtain medical information, and logistical problems with the office. Disinterest in the portal was linked to satisfaction with the provider-patient relationship, including provider communication/responsiveness, difficulty in using the portal, and fear of losing relationships and e-mail contact with the provider. No patient identified encrypted e-mail communication through the portal as an advantage.

conclusionsPromoting the use of computerized portals requires patient-based adaptations. These should include ease of use, direct provider e-mail, and reassurances that access and interpersonal relationships will not be lost. Education is needed about privacy concerns regarding traditional e-mail communication.

Indexed as

Attitude to ComputersPatient Access to RecordsProfessional-Patient RelationsAdultChronic DiseaseCommunicationComputational BiologyDiabetes MellitusElectronic MailFemaleFocus GroupsHealth Services ResearchHumansMaleMedical Records Systems, ComputerizedMiddle Aged

Identifiers

PMID18095039
PMCPMC2338160
OpenAlexW2062027977

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.