Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26245805›Full record

ArticleBMC psychiatry2015

Electronic personal health records for people with severe mental illness; a feasibility study.

Dan Robotham, Matthew Mayhew, Diana Rose, Til Wykes

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC psychiatry, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.7field-weighted citation impact, top 10% of its field
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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 40 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Interventions to increase patient portal use in vulnerable populations: a systematic review.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2019
    Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. 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
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. 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

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Dan RobothamDepartment of Psychology, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology & Neuroscience, King's College London, De Crespigny Park, London, SE5 8AF, UK. dan.robotham@kcl.ac.uk.
Matthew MayhewDepartment of Psychology, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology & Neuroscience, King's College London, De Crespigny Park, London, SE5 8AF, UK. matthew.1.mayhew@kcl.ac.uk.
Diana RoseDepartment of Psychology, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology & Neuroscience, King's College London, De Crespigny Park, London, SE5 8AF, UK. diana.rose@kcl.ac.uk.
Til WykesDepartment of Psychology, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology & Neuroscience, King's College London, De Crespigny Park, London, SE5 8AF, UK. til.wykes@kcl.ac.uk.
King's College London · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundElectronic Patient Health Records (ePHRs) contain information created, accessed, monitored and maintained by patients. This paper describes how an ePHR called myhealthlocker™ was used by people with severe mental illness to monitor and input their own health-related outcomes, and whether they derived any benefit from it.

methodIndividuals using local secondary mental health services were provided with access to myhealthlocker, an ePHR which allowed them to monitor their health and input information from Patient Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) across to their clinical record. Participants were given support to use myhealthlocker through drop-in sessions facilitated by an Occupational Therapist. Usage of the site was monitored over time. Surveys and interviews were used to investigate what participants thought about the intervention.

results32 of 58 participants used the ePHR (where usage was defined by logging in at least twice and completing a PROM). Almost all participants who used the site had been referred from community rather than inpatient services. Of those who used the site, 26 out of 32 used it primarily or exclusively through supported drop-in sessions. Almost half of those participants who used the site had used it outside the drop-in sessions. Those who used the site found it useful (n = 32), and most said they would continue to use it (n = 27). There were no apparent differences in usage across gender, diagnosis, and length of service use history. Suggestions for improvement included a social networking component, and finding ways to engage clinicians. In particular, users valued the ability to monitor health outcomes over time.

conclusionsPeople with severe mental illness were able to use an ePHR and derive benefit from monitoring and inputting PROMs. Those who use the site are more likely to have been referred from community mental health services, and then supported to access the ePHR.

Indexed as

Feasibility StudiesHealth Records, PersonalAdolescentAdultAgedCommunity Mental Health ServicesElectronic Health RecordsFemaleHumansMaleMental DisordersMiddle AgedPatient SatisfactionSmartphoneYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID26245805
PMCPMC4527241
OpenAlexW1960855025

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.