Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28460042›Full record

ArticleJournal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA2017

Information technology to support patient engagement: where do we stand and where can we go?

Daniel M Walker, Cynthia J Sieck, Terri Menser, Timothy R Huerta, Ann Scheck McAlearney

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing papers in PubMed
–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

27 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Implementation of an Automated Phone Call Distribution System in an Inpatient Pharmacy Setting.Federal practitioner : for the health care professionals of the VA, DoD, and PHS · 2023
    Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Exploring the Digital Divide: Age and Race Disparities in Use of an Inpatient Portal.Telemedicine journal and e-health : the official journal of the American Telemedicine Association · 2020
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Observational
  18. The Role of Participants in a Medical Information Commons.The Journal of law, medicine & ethics : a journal of the American Society of Law, Medicine & Ethics · 2019
    Article
  19. Article
  20. Inpatient portal clusters: identifying user groups based on portal features.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2019
    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

5 authors.

Daniel M WalkerDepartment of Family Medicine, College of Medicine, Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, USA.
Cynthia J SieckDepartment of Family Medicine, College of Medicine, Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, USA.
Terri MenserDepartment of Family Medicine, College of Medicine, Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, USA.
Timothy R HuertaDepartment of Family Medicine, College of Medicine, Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, USA.
Ann Scheck McAlearneyDepartment of Family Medicine, College of Medicine, Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, USA.

Funding

High Tech and High Touch (HT2): Transforming patient engagement through portal technology at the bedsideR01HS024091 · AHRQ · OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY · PI MCALEARNEY, ANN SCHECK · 2015 to 2018
$967k
AHRQ HHS R01 HS024091
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveGiven the strong push to empower patients and make them partners in their health care, we evaluated the current capability of hospitals to offer health information technology that facilitates patient engagement (PE). MATERIALS AND

methodsUsing an ontology mapping approach, items from the American Hospital Association Information Technology Supplement were mapped to defined levels and categories within the PE Framework. Points were assigned for each health information technology function based upon the level of engagement it encompassed to create a PE-information technology (PE-IT) score. Scores were divided into tertiles, and hospital characteristics were compared across tertiles. An ordered logit model was used to estimate the effect of characteristics on the adjusted odds of being in the highest tertile of PE-IT scores.

resultsThirty-six functions were mapped to specific levels and categories of the PE Framework, and adoption of each item ranged from 23.5 to 96.7%. Hospital characteristics associated with being in the highest tertile of PE-IT scores included medium and large bed size (relative to small), nonprofit (relative to government nonfederal), teaching hospital, system member, Midwest and South regions, and urban location. DISCUSSION: Hospital adoption of PE-oriented technology remains varied, suggesting that hospitals are considering how technology can create partnerships with patients. However, PE functionalities that facilitate higher levels of engagement are lacking, suggesting room for improvement.

conclusionWhile hospitals have reached modest levels of adoption of PE technologies, consistent monitoring of this capacity can identify opportunities to use technology to facilitate engagement.

Indexed as

HospitalsMedical InformaticsPatient ParticipationCross-Sectional StudiesElectronic Health RecordsHealth Information ManagementHumansMeaningful UsePatient Education as TopicPatient PortalsUnited Stateselectronic health recordhealth information technologypatient engagementpatient portals

Identifiers

PMID28460042
PMCPMC7651912

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.