ArticleJournal of general internal medicine2015
Patient Preferences for Test Result Notification.
Article in Journal of general internal medicine, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.
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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 29 citations in OpenAlex.
- Diet and exercise changes following bone densitometry in the Patient Activation After DXA Result Notification (PAADRN) study.Archives of osteoporosis · 2018Trial
- Racial Differences and Disparities in Osteoporosis-related Bone Health: Results From the PAADRN Randomized Controlled Trial.Medical care · 2017Trial
- Chatbot for the Return of Positive Genetic Screening Results for Hereditary Cancer Syndromes: Prompt Engineering Project.JMIR cancer · 2025Article
- Developing video education materials for the return of genomic test results to parents and adolescents.PEC innovation · 2022Article
- Article
- Can patients contribute to enhancing the safety and effectiveness of test-result follow-up? Qualitative outcomes from a health consumer workshop.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2021Article
- How Giving and Receiving Information Has Shaped My Cancer Journey.Annals of family medicine · 2020Article
- Understanding the Return of Genomic Sequencing Results Process: Content Review of Participant Summary Letters in the eMERGE Research Network.Journal of personalized medicine · 2020Article
- Characteristics of older adults using patient web portals to view their DXA results.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2019Article
- Implications of Patient Portal Transparency in Oncology: Qualitative Interview Study on the Experiences of Patients, Oncologists, and Medical Informaticists.JMIR cancer · 2018Article
- Improving Timely Resident Follow-Up and Communication of Results in Ambulatory Clinics Utilizing a Web-Based Audit and Feedback Module.Journal of graduate medical education · 2017Article
- Capsule Commentary on Shultz et al., Patient Preferences for Test Result Notification.Journal of general internal medicine · 2015Article
- Patient Preferences With Regard to Care Structures for Cervical or Vulvar Dysplasia in Certified Dysplasia Clinics in Germany.In vivo (Athens, Greece)Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
5 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
importancePatients are increasingly being given access to their test results, but little is known about how preferences vary with the test under consideration or the results of the test (normal or abnormal).
objectiveThis study was conducted to examine preferences for test result communication. DESIGN, SETTING, AND
participantsWe surveyed adults to explore their preferences for test result notification for three common diagnostic tests of varying "emotional impact" (dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry [DXA], genital herpes, and cancer biopsy) when test results were 1) normal and 2) abnormal. We conducted our survey between June and August 2012 on the campus of an academic medical center. For each scenario, subjects were asked to rank seven methods that might be used to communicate test results (letter, unsecured email, secured email, text message, telephone call, secure Web portal, office visit) in order of acceptability.
main outcome measuresThe main measures were the percentage of respondents who ranked a particular test result notification method favorably and the percentage who ranked it as unacceptable.
resultsWhen test results were normal, subjects' notification preferences were generally similar for DXA, herpes and cancer biopsy, with telephone and letter ranked most favorably for all three tests. Conversely, text message and unsecured email were viewed as unacceptable notification methods for normal results by 45.0-55.0 % of subjects across all three tests. When test results were abnormal, office visits became more popular. A higher proportion of subjects ranked office visits as their most preferred notification method for our test with high "emotional impact" (cancer biopsy) (38.4 %) as compared to DXA (28.2 %) and herpes (27.9 %) (P = 0.02). For most test scenarios, younger subjects appeared to rank electronic communication modalities (secure email or Web portal) higher than older subjects, though this difference did not reach statistical significance (P = 0.29).
conclusionsPreferences for test result notification can differ substantially depending upon the test under consideration and results of the test. Providers and health care systems should consider these factors when deciding how to communicate results to patients.
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.