Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25403285›Full record

ArticleBMC psychiatry2014

Collaborative development of an electronic Personal Health Record for people with severe and enduring mental health problems.

Liam Ennis, Dan Robotham, Mike Denis, Ninjeri Pandit, Dave Newton, Diana Rose, Til Wykes

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in BMC psychiatry, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed, 5 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

21 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Trial
  7. Coverage and quality of patient participation groups: a mixed-methods analysis of Care Quality Commission reports.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2026
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Helping clinicians and patients navigate electronic patient portals: ethical and legal principles.CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne · 2019
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Over promised, over-sold and underperforming? - e-health in mental health.Journal of mental health (Abingdon, England) · 2016
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

7 authors.

Liam EnnisKing's College London, Institute of Psychiatry, De Crespigny Park, London, SE5 8AF, UK. liam.ennis@kcl.ac.uk.
Dan RobothamKing's College London, Institute of Psychiatry, De Crespigny Park, London, SE5 8AF, UK. dan.robotham@kcl.ac.uk.
Mike DenisSouth London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK. mike.denis@medsci.ox.ac.uk.
Ninjeri PanditSouth London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK. ninjeri.pandit@nhs.net.
Dave NewtonSouth London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK. david.newton@slam.nhs.uk.
Diana RoseKing's College London, Institute of Psychiatry, De Crespigny Park, London, SE5 8AF, UK. diana.rose@kcl.ac.uk.
Til WykesKing's College London, Institute of Psychiatry, De Crespigny Park, London, SE5 8AF, UK. til.wykes@kcl.ac.uk.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPrevious attempts to implement electronic Personal Health Records (ePHRs) underline the importance of stakeholder involvement. We describe the development of an ePHR for people with severe and enduring mental health problems, and provide a model of involving stakeholders throughout.

methodsThere were three stages to the development of the ePHR. These were 1) identifying and responding to user and clinical needs; 2) preliminary testing; and 3) preliminary implementation. Stakeholder involvement was pervasive in all stages. We collaborated with 133 stakeholders in the first stage, 13 in the second, and 26 in the third. On the micro-level, a service user researcher conducted much of the data collection and analysis. On the macro-level, a service user advisory group guided decisions throughout the project, and a service user was an active member of the project executive board and the implementation team.

resultsService users and clinicians preferred an interactive ePHR with features such as access to care plans and care notes, a mood tracker, patient reported outcomes feeding into the clinical record, and social networking features. Many of the above were constructed following consultation with the relevant professionals, however further consultation is required before building a social networking function or providing access to full care notes. Service users positively rated the usability of the ePHR. Drop-in sessions helped service users access technology and learn how to use the ePHR.

conclusionsWe outline four considerations for future developers of ePHRs: appeal, construction, ease of use, and implementation. Success rests on implementation in routine practice, so ePHRs must be intuitive and useful for both service users and staff. Continued involvement of end users throughout the design and testing process can help to achieve this goal.

Indexed as

Cooperative BehaviorHealth Records, PersonalSeverity of Illness IndexAdultElectronic Health RecordsFemaleHealth Services Needs and DemandHumansMaleMental DisordersMental HealthMiddle AgedProgram DevelopmentTime Factors

Identifiers

PMID25403285
PMCPMC4245793

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.