ArticleJournal of medical Internet research2009
Acceptability of a personally controlled health record in a community-based setting: implications for policy and design.
Article in Journal of medical Internet research, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 52 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
52 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 120 citations in OpenAlex.
- What are the functionalities and features of mobile health record apps supporting persons experiencing social exclusion? A systematic literature review.Frontiers in digital health · 2025Pooled it
- Quantifying Patient Portal Use: Systematic Review of Utilization Metrics.Journal of medical Internet research · 2021Pooled it
- Patients' online access to their electronic health records and linked online services: a systematic interpretative review.BMJ open · 2014Pooled it
- Influencing factors of continuance intention of medical applications for the elderly.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Digital Information Exchange Between the Public and Researchers in Health Studies: Scoping Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Article
- The Use of a Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) to Predict Patients' Usage of a Personal Health Record System: The Role of Security, Privacy, and Usability.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023Article
- Sociotechnical Drivers and Barriers in the Consumer Adoption of Personal Health Records: Empirical Investigation.JMIR medical informatics · 2021Article
- How Should Home-Based Maternal and Child Health Records Be Implemented? A Global Framework Analysis.Global health, science and practice · 2020Article
- Patient Attitudes About Viewing Their Radiology Images Online: Preintervention Survey.Journal of medical Internet research · 2019Article
- Informed Consent in Biomedical Research.Computational and structural biotechnology journal · 2019Review
- Enhancing Privacy Controls for Patients via a Selective Authentic Electronic Health Record Exchange Service: Qualitative Study of Perspectives by Medical Professionals and Patients.Journal of medical Internet research · 2018Article
- Article
- Article
- A patient-centered system in a provider-centered world: challenges of incorporating post-discharge wound data into practice.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2016Article
- User-Centered Design Groups to Engage Patients and Caregivers with a Personalized Health Information Technology Tool.Biology of blood and marrow transplantation : journal of the American Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation · 2016Article
- Personal Health Records: Beneficial or Burdensome for Patients and Healthcare Providers?Perspectives in health information managemen · 2016Article
- Patients' Online Access to Their Primary Care Electronic Health Records and Linked Online Services: Implications for Research and Practice.Journal of personalized medicine · 2015Article
- The Impact of an eHealth Portal on Health Care Professionals' Interaction with Patients: Qualitative Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2015Article
- The patients' active role in managing a personal electronic health record: a qualitative analysis.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2015Article
- Caregiver Preferences Regarding Personal Health Records in the Management of ADHD.Clinical pediatrics · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundConsumer-centered health information systems that address problems related to fragmented health records and disengaged and disempowered patients are needed, as are information systems that support public health monitoring and research. Personally controlled health records (PCHRs) represent one response to these needs. PCHRs are a special class of personal health records (PHRs) distinguished by the extent to which users control record access and contents. Recently launched PCHR platforms include Google Health, Microsoft's HealthVault, and the Dossia platform, based on Indivo.
objectiveTo understand the acceptability, early impacts, policy, and design requirements of PCHRs in a community-based setting.
methodsObservational and narrative data relating to acceptability, adoption, and use of a personally controlled health record were collected and analyzed within a formative evaluation of a PCHR demonstration. Subjects were affiliates of a managed care organization run by an urban university in the northeastern United States. Data were collected using focus groups, semi-structured individual interviews, and content review of email communications. Subjects included: n = 20 administrators, clinicians, and institutional stakeholders who participated in pre-deployment group or individual interviews; n = 52 community members who participated in usability testing and/or pre-deployment piloting; and n = 250 subjects who participated in the full demonstration of which n = 81 initiated email communications to troubleshoot problems or provide feedback. All data were formatted as narrative text and coded thematically by two independent analysts using a shared rubric of a priori defined major codes. Sub-themes were identified by analysts using an iterative inductive process. Themes were reviewed within and across research activities (ie, focus group, usability testing, email content review) and triangulated to identify patterns.
resultsLow levels of familiarity with PCHRs were found as were high expectations for capabilities of nascent systems. Perceived value for PCHRs was highest around abilities to co-locate, view, update, and share health information with providers. Expectations were lowest for opportunities to participate in research. Early adopters perceived that PCHR benefits outweighed perceived risks, including those related to inadvertent or intentional information disclosure. Barriers and facilitators at institutional, interpersonal, and individual levels were identified. Endorsement of a dynamic platform model PCHR was evidenced by preferences for embedded searching, linking, and messaging capabilities in PCHRs; by high expectations for within-system tailored communications; and by expectation of linkages between self-report and clinical data.
conclusionsLow levels of awareness/preparedness and high expectations for PCHRs exist as a potentially problematic pairing. Educational and technical assistance for lay users and providers are critical to meet challenges related to: access to PCHRs, especially among older cohorts; workflow demands and resistance to change among providers; inadequate health and technology literacy; clarification of boundaries and responsibility for ensuring accuracy and integrity of health information across distributed data systems; and understanding confidentiality and privacy risks. Continued demonstration and evaluation of PCHRs is essential to advancing their use.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.