Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25344621›Full record

ArticleJournal of medical Internet research2014

Patients' continuing use of an online health record: a quantitative evaluation of 14,000 patient years of access data.

Richard G Phelps, Joanne Taylor, Keith Simpson, Jasmine Samuel, A Neil Turner

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of medical Internet research, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 32 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
32citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

32 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Interventions to increase patient portal use in vulnerable populations: a systematic review.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2019
    Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Observational
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Inpatient portal clusters: identifying user groups based on portal features.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2019
    Article
  18. Article
  19. European ADPKD Forum multidisciplinary position statement on autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease care: European ADPKD Forum and Multispecialist Roundtable participants.Nephrology, dialysis, transplantation : official publication of the European Dialysis and Transplant Association - European Renal Association · 2018
    Article
  20. 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.

Richard G PhelpsUniversity of Edinburgh, Renal Autoimmunity Group, Centre for Inflammation Research, Edinburgh, United Kingdom. richard.phelps@ed.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3061-0964

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundOnline access to all or part of their health records is widely demanded by patients and, where provided in form of patient portals, has been substantially used by at least subgroups of patients, particularly those with chronic disease. However, little is reported regarding the longer-term patient use of patient-accessible electronic health record services, which is important in allocating resources. Renal PatientView (RPV) is an established system that gives patients with chronic kidney disease access to live test results and information about their condition and treatment. It is available in most UK renal units with up to 75% of particular patient groups registered in some centers. We have analyzed patient use out to 4 years and investigated factors associated with more persistent use.

objectiveOur aim was to investigate RPV use by patients over time from initial registration in order to understand which patients choose to access RPV and the endurance of its appeal for different patient groups.

methodsWe analyzed an anonymized extract of the database underlying RPV containing information on patient registration and events including patient access and the arrival of new blood test results or letters that patients might wish to view.

resultsAt the time of the extract, there were 11,352 patients registered on RPV for 0-42 months (median 17). More than half of registrants became persistent users, logging in a median of 2.0 times each month over post-registration intervals of up to 42 months (median 18.9). Provision of assistance with first logon was strongly associated with becoming a persistent user, even at 3 years. Logons by persistent users occurred around the time of consultations/tests, strongly suggestive of patient engagement. While indices indicative of greater deprivation were the strongest determinants of non-participation, they had negligible influence on drop-out rates among established users.

conclusionsIn this mature patient portal system, a large proportion of patients made regular use of their online health records over protracted periods. The patterns and timing of use indicate strong patient interest in detailed information such as recent test results and clinic letters. Supporting patients through the first steps of establishing access to their online records is associated with much higher rates of long-term use of RPV and likely would increase use of other electronic health records provided for patients with chronic disease.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultAgedElectronic Health RecordsFemaleHealth Records, PersonalHumansKidney Failure, ChronicMaleMedical Records Systems, ComputerizedMiddle AgedUnited KingdomYoung Adultchronic renal insufficiencyelectronic health recordspatient access to personal recordsutilization

Identifiers

PMID25344621
PMCPMC4259918

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.