ReviewDer Nervenarzt2015
[Patient access to medical records. Ethical considerations on its realization in psychiatry].
Review in Der Nervenarzt, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIn medical ethics there is broad agreement that patients should be empowered to make autonomous decisions about their health and that objective, detailed information promotes these decisions. According to German law patients have a right of access to their own medical records.
objectivesWhich advantages and disadvantages does the access to records have for doctors and patients in psychiatry? Which requirements should be met to make access reasonable for patients? MATERIAL AND
methodsThis article presents an analysis of the legal situation and the state of research, evaluation of empirical studies, discussion of features of psychiatry, its language and patients as well as their influence on access to medical records.
resultsPsychiatrists are sometimes concerned about patient access to medical records and some psychiatric patients feel upset or uncomfortable after having inspected their records. The misunderstanding and stigmatization of psychiatric terms, the vulnerability of psychiatric patients and the nature of psychiatric disorders, the description of which affects fundamental aspects of personality, all play a role in this. In addition, in having access to their records patients use a source of information that was originally written for other addressees. Information content and language are not adapted to their needs. Possible solutions could involve improvements in patient education and (stylistic) changes in writing records.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.