Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26385117›Full record

ArticleJournal of general internal medicine2016

Using Digital Technology to Engage and Communicate with Patients: A Survey of Patient Attitudes.

Brian P Jenssen, Nandita Mitra, Anand Shah, Fei Wan, David Grande

Abstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of general internal medicine, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

25 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Vapes, E-cigs, and Mods: What Do Young Adults Call E-cigarettes?Nicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco · 2020
    Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Use of text messaging in general practice: a mixed methods investigation on GPs' and patients' views.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2017
    Article
  19. Article
  20. eHealth patient-provider communication in the United States: interest, inequalities, and predictors.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2017
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Brian P JenssenRobert Wood Johnson Foundation Clinical Scholars Program, University of Pennsylvania, 1310 Blockley Hall, 423 Guardian Drive, Philadelphia, PA, 19104, USA. jenssenb@email.chop.edu.
Nandita MitraDepartment of Biostatistics and Epidemiology, University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Anand ShahPCCI, Dallas, TX, USA.
Fei WanDepartment of Biostatistics and Epidemiology, University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
David GrandeDivision of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, PA, USA.

Funding

Secondary Uses of Health Information: Patient Preferences for Sharing and ConsentR21HG006047 · NHGRI · UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA · PI GRANDE, DAVID T · 2011 to 2012
$440k
NHGRI NIH HHS 5R21HG006047-02NHGRI NIH HHS R21 HG006047
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAs primary care moves toward a system of population health management, providers will need to engage patients outside traditional office-based interactions.

objectiveWe assessed patient attitudes regarding technology use to communicate with their primary care team or to engage with other patients outside typical office settings. Design/Participants/Main Measures We conducted a national survey using GfK KnowledgePanel(®) to examine attitudes on the use of digital technology (email, text messaging, and social media such as Facebook and Twitter) to communicate with primary care teams about health behavior goals and test results. We also assessed attitudes toward the use of digital technologies to engage with other patients in activities such as peer coaching. KEY

resultsOf the 5119 panel members invited to participate, 3336 completed the survey (response rate, 65.2 %). Among respondents, more than half (58 %) reported using Facebook, and nearly two-thirds (64.1 %) used text messaging. Overall, few participants were willing to communicate about health goals via social media (3.1 %) or text messaging (13.3 %), compared to email (48.8 %) or phone (75.5 %) (results were similar for communication about test results). Among those that used text messaging, race/ethnicity was the only factor independently associated with greater support for text messaging [African American (OR 1.44; 95 % CI, 1.01-2.06) and Hispanic (OR 1.8; 95 % CI, 1.25-2.59)] in multivariate models. Participants interested in engaging in peer coaching through Facebook (11.7 %) were more likely to be younger (p < 0.0001), female (p < 0.001), and a racial/ethnic minority (African American, non-Hispanic or Hispanic, p < 0.0004).

conclusionsDespite regular use of new digital technology such as text messaging and social media, few participants supported using these tools for communicating with their physicians' practice. Participants were most supportive of using email for communication. Contrary to previous studies, among users of technology, low socioeconomic status and racial/ethnic minorities were equally or more likely to support use.

Indexed as

Attitude to HealthCommunicationPhysician-Patient RelationsSurveys and QuestionnairesAdolescentAdultComputer Communication NetworksFemaleHealth BehaviorHumansInternetMaleMiddle AgedPrimary Health CareYoung Adultemailpatient engagementsocial mediatechnology usetext messaging

Identifiers

PMID26385117
PMCPMC4699992

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.