Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24532296›Full record

ArticleJournal of nephrology2014

Single-centre experience with Renal PatientView, a web-based system that provides patients with access to their laboratory results.

Alexander Woywodt, Kervina Vythelingum, Scott Rayner, John Anderton, Aimun Ahmed

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of nephrology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 1 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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. [Digital nephrology].Der nephrologe · 2021
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Alexander WoywodtDepartment of Renal Medicine, Lancashire Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Royal Preston Hospital, Sharoe Green Lane, Preston, Lancashire, PR2 9HT, UK, Alex.Woywodt@lthtr.nhs.uk.
Kervina Vythelingum
Scott Rayner
John Anderton
Aimun Ahmed

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundRenal PatientView (RPV) is a novel, web-based system in the UK that provides patients with access to their laboratory results, in conjunction with patient information.

aimTo study how renal patients within our centre access and use RPV.

methodsWe sent out questionnaires in December 2011 to all 651 RPV users under our care. We collected information on aspects such as the frequency and timing of RPV usage, the parameters viewed by users, and the impact of RPV on their care.

resultsA total of 295 (45 %) questionnaires were returned. The predominant users of RPV were transplant patients (42 %) followed by pre-dialysis chronic kidney disease patients (37 %). Forty-two percent of RPV users accessed their results after their clinic appointments, 38 % prior to visiting the clinic. The majority of patients (76 %) had used the system to discuss treatment with their renal physician, while 20 % of patients gave permission to other members of their family to use RPV to monitor results on their behalf. Most users (78 %) reported accessing RPV on average 1-5 times/month. Most patients used RPV to monitor their kidney function, 81 % to check creatinine levels, 57 % to check potassium results. Ninety-two percent of patients found RPV easy to use and 93 % felt that overall the system helps them in taking care of their condition; 53 % of patients reported high satisfaction with RPV.

conclusionOur results provide interesting insight into use of a system that gives patients web-based access to laboratory results. The fact that 20 % of patients delegate access to relatives also warrants further study. We propose that online access to laboratory results should be offered to all renal patients, although clinicians need to be mindful of the 'digital divide', i.e. part of the population that is not amenable to IT-based strategies for patient empowerment.

Indexed as

Access to InformationDiagnostic Techniques, UrologicalElectronic Health RecordsHealth Records, PersonalInternetPatient SatisfactionAdultAgedAged, 80 and overAttitude to ComputersEnglandFemaleHealth Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeHumansMaleMiddle Aged

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.