Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25707035›Full record

SynthesisJournal of medical Internet research2015

Patient and provider attitudes toward the use of patient portals for the management of chronic disease: a systematic review.

Clemens Scott Kruse, Darcy A Argueta, Lynsey Lopez, Anju Nair

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Journal of medical Internet research, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 195 papers, 8 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
195citing papers in PubMed, 8 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

195 citing papers in PubMed, 8 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. A randomized controlled trial to improve engagement of hospitalized patients with their patient portals.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2018
    Trial
  12. Engaging hospital patients in the medication reconciliation process using tablet computers.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2018
    Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Trial
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

135 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

4 authors.

Clemens Scott KruseSchool of Health Administration, College of Health Professions, Texas State University, San Marcos, TX, United States. scottkruse@txstate.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7636-1086

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPatient portals provide patients with the tools to better manage and understand their health status. However, widespread adoption of patient portals faces resistance from patients and providers for a number of reasons, and there is limited evidence evaluating the characteristics of patient portals that received positive remarks from patients and providers.

objectiveThe objectives of this systematic review are to identify the shared characteristics of portals that receive favorable responses from patients and providers and to identify the elements that patients and providers believe need improvement.

methodsThe authors conducted a systematic search of the CINAHL and PubMed databases to gather data about the use of patient portals in the management of chronic disease. Two reviewers analyzed the articles collected in the search process in order remove irrelevant articles. The authors selected 27 articles to use in the literature review.

resultsResults of this systematic review conclude that patient portals show significant improvements in patient self-management of chronic disease and improve the quality of care provided by providers. The most prevalent positive attribute was patient-provider communication, which appeared in 10 of 27 articles (37%). This was noted by both patients and providers. The most prevalent negative perceptions are security (concerns) and user-friendliness, both of which occurred in 11 of 27 articles (41%). The user-friendliness quality was a concern for patients and providers who are not familiar with advanced technology and therefore find it difficult to navigate the patient portal. The high cost of installation and maintenance of a portal system, not surprisingly, deters some providers from implementing such technology into their practice, but this was only mentioned in 3 of the 27 articles (11%). It is possible that the incentives for meaningful use assuage the barrier of cost.

conclusionsThis systematic review revealed mixed attitudes from patients and their providers regarding the use of patient portals to manage their chronic disease. The authors suggest that a standard patient portal design providing patients with the resources to understand and manage their chronic conditions will promote the adoption of patient portals in health care organizations.

Indexed as

Electronic Health RecordsHealth Records, PersonalAttitudeChronic DiseaseCommunicationDisease ManagementHealth PersonnelHumansMalePatient SatisfactionSelf Carechronic diseasedisease managementelectronic health record (EHR)health information technology (HIT)internetpatient portalself-management

Identifiers

PMID25707035
PMCPMC4376181

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.