ArticleBMJ (Clinical research ed.)2010
Adoption, non-adoption, and abandonment of a personal electronic health record: case study of HealthSpace.
Article in BMJ (Clinical research ed.), 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 141 papers, 10 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
141 citing papers in PubMed, 10 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Health Outcomes and Healthcare Efficiencies Associated with the Use of Electronic Health Records in Hospital Emergency Departments: a Systematic Review.Journal of medical systems · 2020Pooled it
- Applying the Electronic Health Literacy Lens: Systematic Review of Electronic Health Interventions Targeted at Socially Disadvantaged Groups.Journal of medical Internet research · 2020Pooled it
- Barriers to patient, provider, and caregiver adoption and use of electronic personal health records in chronic care: a systematic review.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2020Pooled it
- The usefulness and acceptability of a personal health record to children and young people living with a complex health condition: A realist review of the literature.Child: care, health and development · 2019Pooled it
- The Impact of Patient Online Access to Computerized Medical Records and Services on Type 2 Diabetes: Systematic Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2018Pooled it
- Factors Determining the Success and Failure of eHealth Interventions: Systematic Review of the Literature.Journal of medical Internet research · 2018Pooled it
- Understanding factors affecting patient and public engagement and recruitment to digital health interventions: a systematic review of qualitative studies.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2016Pooled it
- Conditions potentially sensitive to a personal health record (PHR) intervention, a systematic review.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2015Pooled it
- Patients' online access to their electronic health records and linked online services: a systematic interpretative review.BMJ open · 2014Pooled it
- Are personal health records safe? A review of free web-accessible personal health record privacy policies.Journal of medical Internet research · 2012Pooled it
- Studying the Digital Intervention Engagement-Mediated Relationship Between Intrapersonal Measures and Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis Adherence in Sexual and Gender Minority Youth: Secondary Analysis of a Randomized Controlled Trial.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Trial
- Effects of the Proactive Interdisciplinary Self-Management (PRISMA) Program on Online Care Platform Usage in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes in Primary Care: A Randomized Controlled Trial.Journal of diabetes research · 2020Trial
- "Why Didn't it Work?" Lessons From a Randomized Controlled Trial of a Web-based Personally Controlled Health Management System for Adults with Asthma.Journal of medical Internet research · 2015Trial
- Trial
- The challenges of real-world implementation of web-based shared care software: the HopSCOTCH Shared-Care Obesity Trial in Children.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2014Trial
- Exploring barriers to participation and adoption of telehealth and telecare within the Whole System Demonstrator trial: a qualitative study.BMC health services research · 2012Trial
- Impact of a web-based personally controlled health management system on influenza vaccination and health services utilization rates: a randomized controlled trial.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIATrial
- Confronting complexity: toward equitable healthcare technology design and evaluation for socioeconomically marginalized patients.JAMIA open · 2026Article
- Exploring Patient Empowerment and Health System Outcomes Associated With MyHealthNB, a Provincial Personal Health Record System: Exploratory Mixed Methods Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Failed Implementation of Mobile Access to Electronic Health Records in Home Care: Qualitative Study in Sweden.JMIR mHealth and uHealth · 2026Article
81 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo evaluate the policy making process, implementation by NHS organisations, and patients' and carers' experiences of efforts to introduce an internet accessible personal electronic health record (HealthSpace) in a public sector healthcare system.
designMixed method, multilevel case study.
settingEnglish National Health Service; the basic HealthSpace technology (available throughout England) and the advanced version (available in a few localities where this option had been introduced) were considered.
main outcome measuresNational statistics on invitations sent, HealthSpace accounts created, and interviews and ethnographic observation of patients and carers. Data analysis was informed by a socio-technical approach which considered macro and micro influences on both adoption and non-adoption of innovations, and by the principles of critical discourse analysis.
participants56 patients and carers (of whom 21 opened a basic HealthSpace account, 20 had diabetes but were not initially using HealthSpace, and 15 used advanced HealthSpace accounts to exchange messages with their general practitioner), 3000 pages of documents (policies, strategies, business plans, minutes of meetings, correspondence), observational field notes, and 160 interviews with policy makers, project managers, and clinical staff.
resultsBetween 2007 and October 2010, 172 950 people opened a basic HealthSpace account. 2913 (0.13% of those invited) opened an advanced account, compared with 5-10% of the population anticipated in the original business case. Overall, patients perceived HealthSpace as neither useful nor easy to use and its functionality aligned poorly with their expectations and self management practices. Those who used email-style messaging were positive about its benefits, but enthusiasm beyond three early adopter clinicians was low, and fewer than 100 of 30 000 patients expressed interest. Policy makers' hopes that "deploying" HealthSpace would lead to empowered patients, personalised care, lower NHS costs, better data quality, and improved health literacy were not realised over the three year evaluation period.
conclusionUnless personal electronic health records align closely with people's attitudes, self management practices, identified information needs, and the wider care package (including organisational routines and incentive structures for clinicians), the risk that they will be abandoned or not adopted at all is substantial. Conceptualising such records dynamically (as components of a socio-technical network) rather than statically (as containers for data) and employing user centred design techniques might improve their chances of adoption and use. The findings raise questions about how eHealth programmes in England are developed and approved at policy level.
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.