Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23027317›Full record

ArticleAnnals of internal medicine2012

Inviting patients to read their doctors' notes: a quasi-experimental study and a look ahead.

Tom Delbanco, Jan Walker, Sigall K Bell, Jonathan D Darer, Joann G Elmore, Nadine Farag, Henry J Feldman, Roanne Mejilla, Long Ngo, James D Ralston and 4 more

Erratum issued 2 registry-linked trialsAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Annals of internal medicine, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 329 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
329citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

NCT03283553 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2017, after this paper: background citation

Involving Family to Improve Communication in Breast Cancer Care

TypeinterventionalSponsorSidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center at Johns HopkinsRan2017 to 2019Enrolled132ConditionsActive Breast Cancer TreatmentArmsChecklist, MyChart, OpenNotes, Usual Care
NCT07602725 nanot yet recruitingnot on this mapstarted 2026, after this paper: background citation

Patient Experience and Trust When Viewing Original Medical Notes Versus Large Language Model (LLM)-Generated Plain Language Summaries

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity of Texas at AustinRan2026 to 2027Enrolled135ConditionsMusculoskeletal Disease, Orthopedic PatientsArmsLLM-Generated Medical Note, Control (Original Medical Note)
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

329 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Interventions to increase patient portal use in vulnerable populations: a systematic review.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2019
    Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

269 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

14 authors.

Tom DelbancoBeth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA 02215, USA.
Jan Walker
Sigall K Bell
Jonathan D Darer
Joann G Elmore
Nadine Farag
Henry J Feldman
Roanne Mejilla
Long Ngo
James D Ralston
Stephen E Ross
Neha Trivedi
Elisabeth Vodicka
Suzanne G Leveille

Funding

Improving Accuracy &Outcomes of Breast Cancer ScreeningK05CA104699 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI ELMORE, JOANN G · 2004 to 2014
$1.2M
NCI NIH HHS K05 CA 104699NCI NIH HHS K05 CA104699
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundLittle information exists about what primary care physicians (PCPs) and patients experience if patients are invited to read their doctors' office notes.

objectiveTo evaluate the effect on doctors and patients of facilitating patient access to visit notes over secure Internet portals.

designQuasi-experimental trial of PCPs and patient volunteers in a year-long program that provided patients with electronic links to their doctors' notes.

settingPrimary care practices at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center (BIDMC) in Massachusetts, Geisinger Health System (GHS) in Pennsylvania, and Harborview Medical Center (HMC) in Washington.

participants105 PCPs and 13,564 of their patients who had at least 1 completed note available during the intervention period. MEASUREMENTS: Portal use and electronic messaging by patients and surveys focusing on participants' perceptions of behaviors, benefits, and negative consequences.

results11,155 [corrected] of 13,564 patients with visit notes available opened at least 1 note (84% at BIDMC, 82% [corrected] at GHS, and 47% at HMC). Of 5219 [corrected] patients who opened at least 1 note and completed a postintervention survey, 77% to 59% [corrected] across the 3 sites reported that open notes helped them feel more in control of their care; 60% to 78% of those taking medications reported increased medication adherence; 26% to 36% had privacy concerns; 1% to 8% reported that the notes caused confusion, worry, or offense; and 20% to 42% reported sharing notes with others. The volume of electronic messages from patients did not change. After the intervention, few doctors reported longer visits (0% to 5%) or more time addressing patients' questions outside of visits (0% to 8%), with practice size having little effect; 3% to 36% of doctors reported changing documentation content; and 0% to 21% reported taking more time writing notes. Looking ahead, 59% to 62% of patients believed that they should be able to add comments to a doctor's note. One out of 3 patients believed that they should be able to approve the notes' contents, but 85% to 96% of doctors did not agree. At the end of the experimental period, 99% of patients wanted open notes to continue and no doctor elected to stop. LIMITATIONS: Only 3 geographic areas were represented, and most participants were experienced in using portals. Doctors volunteering to participate and patients using portals and completing surveys may tend to offer favorable feedback, and the response rate of the patient surveys (41%) may further limit generalizability.

conclusionPatients accessed visit notes frequently, a large majority reported clinically relevant benefits and minimal concerns, and virtually all patients wanted the practice to continue. With doctors experiencing no more than a modest effect on their work lives, open notes seem worthy of widespread adoption. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: The Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, the Drane Family Fund, the Richard and Florence Koplow Charitable Foundation, and the National Cancer Institute.

Indexed as

Electronic Health RecordsPatient Access to RecordsPhysicians, Primary CareAdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overBostonCommunicationConfidentialityFemaleHumansInternetMaleMiddle AgedPennsylvania

Identifiers

PMID23027317
PMCPMC3908866

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

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.