ReviewJournal of medical systems2012
A review of the personal health records in selected countries and Iran.
Review in Journal of medical systems, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Efficacy of an Attachment-Based Intervention Model on Health Indices in Children with Chronic Disease and Their Mothers.Administration and policy in mental health · 2018Trial
- Knowledge, Attitudes, and Practices about Electronic Personal Health Records: A Cross-Sectional Study in a Region of Northern Italy.Journal of medical systems · 2024Article
- Adoption of a Digital Patient Health Passport as Part of a Primary Healthcare Service Delivery: Systematic Review.Journal of personalized medicine · 2022Article
- Designing internet-enabled patient education for self-management of T2D diabetes-The case of the Razavi-Khorasan province in Iran.PloS one · 2021Article
- Personal electronic health records: understanding user requirements and needs in chronic cancer care.Journal of medical Internet research · 2015Article
- Development of Common Data Elements to Provide Tele self-Care Management.Acta informatica medica : AIM : journal of the Society for Medical Informatics of Bosnia & Herzegovina : casopis Drustva za medicinsku informatiku BiH · 2013Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Personal Health Record (PHR) enables patients to access their health information and improves care quality by supporting self-care. The purpose of this study is to provide a comparative analysis of the concept of PHRs in selected countries and Iran in order to investigate the gaps between Iran and more advanced countries in terms of PHRs. The study was carried out in 2008-2009 using a descriptive-comparative method in Australia, the United States, England and Iran. Data was gathered from articles, books, journals and reputed websites in English and Persian published between 1995 and September 2009. After collecting the data, both advantages and disadvantages of each of concepts were analyzed. In the three countries considered in the present study the concepts of PHR, extracted from the literature, are that; a)patient/person be recognized as the owner of PHR; b)information be disclosed only to those authorized by the patient; c) and that PHR is created upon request and consent of the individual involved. Before PHRs can be profitably used in the health administration of a (developing) country, the necessary knowledge, infrastructures, and rules need to be developed.
Indexed as
Identifiers
20703713What 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.