ArticleAnnals of internal medicine2012
Inviting patients to read their doctors' notes: a quasi-experimental study and a look ahead.
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.
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.
Involving Family to Improve Communication in Breast Cancer Care
Patient Experience and Trust When Viewing Original Medical Notes Versus Large Language Model (LLM)-Generated Plain Language Summaries
Who cites it
329 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Impact of online patient access to clinical notes on quality of care: a systematic review.BMJ quality & safety · 2026Pooled it
- The impact of eHealth use on general practice workload in the pre-COVID-19 era: a systematic review.BMC health services research · 2024Pooled it
- Interventions to increase patient portal use in vulnerable populations: a systematic review.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2019Pooled it
- Providing Mobile Patient Access to Their Electronic Secondary Care Patient Record in Adults With Cystic Fibrosis: Results of a Prospective, Parallel, Randomized Open-Pilot Quantitative Study.JMIR formative research · 2025Trial
- Sharing in care: engaging care partners in the care and communication of breast cancer patients.Breast cancer research and treatment · 2019Trial
- Improving Electronic Health Record Note Comprehension With NoteAid: Randomized Trial of Electronic Health Record Note Comprehension Interventions With Crowdsourced Workers.Journal of medical Internet research · 2019Trial
- Communicating with Vulnerable Patient Populations: A Randomized Intervention to Teach Inpatients to Use the Electronic Patient Portal.Applied clinical informatics · 2018Trial
- Beyond Transparency : Ethical Note Obligations, Documentation Burden, and the Ethical Adoption of AI-Assisted Documentation.Journal of bioethical inquiry · 2026Article
- Letter to the Editor: Closing the loop in radiology-patient access to reports as an additional safety layer.Insights into imaging · 2026Article
- Patient Portal Activation Disparities by Ward, Census Tract, and Zip Code in an Urban Landscape Among Neurology Patients: Cross-Sectional Multi-Scale Analysis.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Patients' and parents' views on how digital tools enable personalized and partnered care in genetics: a qualitative study.European journal of human genetics : EJHG · 2026Article
- An Evaluation of AI-Generated Clinical Notes in the OpenNotes Era: A Thematic Analysis of Clinician Discourse.Journal of evaluation in clinical practice · 2026Article
- Article
- Clinical Digital Health Engagement and Psychological Distress Among Adults.JAMA network open · 2026Article
- Timely nudges promote patient portal enrollment and sustained engagement: a randomized controlled trial.JAMIA open · 2026Article
- Parent Experiences Accessing Inpatient Clinical Notes on a Pediatric Oncology Service.Hospital pediatrics · 2026Article
- Understanding Patient-Reported Offenses in Electronic Health Records: Cross-Sectional Mixed Methods Survey.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Patient Preferences for Plain-Language Alternatives to Medical Jargon in Clinical Notes.Journal of general internal medicine · 2026Article
- MyCODE: a prospective evaluation of lay-language molecular tumor board protocols in precision oncology.The oncologist · 2026Article
- Access to Online Patient Portals for Adolescents With Cancer: Benefits, Concerns, and Challenges.Pediatric blood & cancer · 2026Article
269 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
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
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.