Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25059439›Full record

SynthesisHealth expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy2015

Patients' views on the effectiveness of patient-held records: a systematic review and thematic synthesis of qualitative studies.

Samantha A Sartain, Samantha Stressing, Jacqui Prieto

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing 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.

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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Patients', carers' and healthcare providers' views of patient-held health records in Kerala, India: A qualitative exploratory study.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2023
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. The Patient-Held Active Record of Medication Status (PHARMS) study: a mixed-methods feasibility analysis.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2019
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
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

3 authors.

Samantha A SartainFaculty of Health Sciences, Clinical Academic Facility, South Academic Block, Southampton General Hospital, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK.
Samantha StressingSchool of Medicine, Primary Medical Care, Aldermoor Health Centre, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK.
Jacqui PrietoFaculty of Health Sciences, Clinical Academic Facility, South Academic Block, Southampton General Hospital, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo synthesise the views of patients on patient-held records (PHR) and to determine from a patient's perspective the effectiveness and any benefits or drawbacks to the PHR.

designSystematic review and thematic synthesis of qualitative studies, which investigate the perspective of patients on the effectiveness of the PHR. DATA SOURCES: Medline, CINAHL, PsychINFO, PubMed, Cochrane. REVIEW

methodsSystematic review of literature relevant to the research question and thematic synthesis involving line by line coding of the quotations from participants and the interpretations of the findings offered by authors.

resultsTen papers that reported the experiences of 455 patients were included in the thematic synthesis. Five studies focused on cancer care, two on mental health, one on antenatal care, one on chronic disease and one on learning disability. The completeness of reporting was variable. Three main themes were identified: (i) practical benefits of the PHR (having a record of one's condition, an aide memoire, useful information source and tool for sharing information across the health system); (ii) psychological benefits of the PHR (empowered to ask questions, a place to record thoughts and feelings and feeling in control); and (iii) drawbacks to the PHR (PHR imposes unwanted responsibility and ineffectiveness).

conclusionsThe effectiveness of the PHR is largely dependent upon uptake across the health system from patients and health-care providers alike. Robust qualitative studies are needed, which offer more complete reporting and examine what patients want and need from a PHR.

Indexed as

Attitude to HealthHealth Records, PersonalHumansQualitative Researcheffectivenesspatient-held recordpatient's perspective

Identifiers

PMID25059439
PMCPMC5810652

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.