ArticleEGEMS (Washington, DC)2016
The Future of Patient Engagement in the Governance of Shared Data.
Article in EGEMS (Washington, DC), 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Through Patients' Eyes: Regulation, Technology, Privacy, and the Future.Yearbook of medical informatics · 2018Article
- Supporting Patient-Provider Collaboration to Identify Individual Triggers using Food and Symptom Journals.CSCW : proceedings of the Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work. Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work · 2017Article
- Comparing Cancer Information Needs for Consumers in the US and China.Studies in health technology and informatics · 2017Article
- Big data in breast cancer: Towards precision treatment.Digital healthReview
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
backgroundThe emerging health care system increasingly values patient engagement and shared decision-making between patients and their providers. The practice of these values is gaining importance as the patient-centered medical home model and personalized medicine come into greater use. OPPORTUNITY FOR IMPROVEMENT: Exploration of patient preferences about personal health data use for research and quality improvement is a fundamental element of the provider-patient relationship. Giving patients an explicit opportunity to discuss their options about use of their data and implementing a process that allows patients to receive desired communications about how their information is used can help build patient trust, a requirement for successful care partnerships. PRACTICE ADVANCEMENT: Working to change organizational cultures that exclude patients from participation in important decisions related to personal health information use promotes a strong patient-provider relationship and, ultimately, lays the foundation for improved health care through expanded use of patient data.
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.