ArticleJMIR research protocols2017
A Personal Electronic Health Record: Study Protocol of a Feasibility Study on Implementation in a Real-World Health Care Setting.
Article in JMIR research protocols, 2017. 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.
- Impact of a Web-Based Electronic Health Record on Behavioral Health Service Delivery for Children and Adolescents: Randomized Controlled Trial.Journal of medical Internet research · 2018Trial
- Preferences and expectations of end-users from a mental health educational portal: A qualitative study.Health promotion perspectives · 2024Article
- Healthcare professionals' knowledge, attitude and its associated factors toward electronic personal health record system in a resource-limited setting: A cross-sectional study.Frontiers in public health · 2023Article
- Mobile Access to Medical Records in Heart Transplantation Aftercare: Mixed-Methods Study Assessing Usability, Feasibility and Effects of a Mobile Application.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Patients' Adoption of Electronic Personal Health Records in England: Secondary Data Analysis.Journal of medical Internet research · 2020Article
- Caregivers' role in using a personal electronic health record: a qualitative study of cancer patients and caregivers in Germany.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2020Article
- Digitalizing Health Services by Implementing a Personal Electronic Health Record in Germany: Qualitative Analysis of Fundamental Prerequisites From the Perspective of Selected Experts.Journal of medical Internet research · 2020Article
- Factors Affecting Patients' Use of Electronic Personal Health Records in England: Cross-Sectional Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2019Article
- Long-term experience with setup and implementation of an IHE-based image management and distribution system in intersectoral clinical routine.International journal of computer assisted radiology and surgery · 2018Article
- Utilizing a Prototype Patient-Controlled Electronic Health Record in Germany: Qualitative Analysis of User-Reported Perceptions and Perspectives.JMIR formative research · 2018Article
- Seamless recording of glucometer measurements among older experienced diabetic patients - A study of perception and usability.PloS one · 2018Article
- Application of Ethics for Providing Telemedicine Services and Information Technology.Medical archives (Sarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina) · 2017Review
- Consumer Adoption of Personal Health Record Systems: A Self-Determination Theory Perspective.Journal of medical Internet research · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundA significant potential for patient empowerment is seen in concepts aiming to give patients access to their personal health information (PHI) and to share this PHI across different care settings and health systems. Personal health records (PHRs) and the availability of information through health information exchanges are considered to be key components of effective and efficient health care. With tethered PHRs, as often used in the United States, patients' opportunities to manage their PHI are strongly restricted. Therefore, within the INFOPAT (information technology for patient oriented care) project (2012-2016) in Germany, funded by the Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF), the development of a patient-controlled "personal electronic health record" (PEPA) was based on user requirements right from the beginning.
objectiveThe overall objective of the study is to implement and evaluate a PEPA prototype for patients with colorectal cancer who are treated at the National Center for Tumor Diseases in Heidelberg. To achieve this aim, this study has 2 parts: a pre-implementation study (phase 1) and an implementation study (phase 2). The pre-implementation study will include a usability evaluation of the PEPA approach and the consideration of organizational preconditions for the implementation. With the implementation study, we will evaluate the process of implementation (eg, barriers or facilitators), the need for organizational change (eg, processes of communication), and the impact on outcomes (eg, self-efficacy, involvement in care).
methodsThe pre-implementation study is based on a mixed methods approach and comprises qualitative and quantitative element according to our research aim. We will use a think-aloud method for the usability analysis. Additionally, participants will be asked to evaluate their overall satisfaction based on a standardized questionnaire, the System Usability Scale. For the analysis of preconditions, we will conduct semistructured personal interviews with, for example, patients, medical assistants, and physicians. Within the implementation study the outcome evaluation is planned as a prospective, 3-month, open-label "before and after" trial. Additionally, for the analysis of processes and the need for organizational change, we will conduct interviews with the participants (eg, patients, general practitioners, physicians) of the before and after trial.
resultsThis project is part of the INFOPAT project, which is funded (2012-2016) by the Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF). The enrolment was completed in July 2016. Data analysis is currently under way and the first results are expected to be submitted for publication at end of 2017.
conclusionsExisting approaches of PHRs aim to give patients access to their treatment data. With the PEPA approach and this study, we go a step further: patients have access to their PHI and they can give other persons (eg, their general practitioner) access. With this approach, new possibilities for professional collaboration and the engagement of patients can arise.
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.