ArticleJMIR medical informatics2017
Design, Implementation, and Evaluation of Self-Describing Diabetes Medical Records: A Pilot Study.
Article in JMIR medical informatics, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Understanding Patient Information Needs About Their Clinical Laboratory Results: A Study of Social Q&A Site.Studies in health technology and informatics · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEach patient's medical record consists of data specific to that patient and is therefore an appropriate source to adapt educational information content.
objectivesThis study aimed to design and implement an information provision system based on the medical records of diabetic patients and to investigate the attitudes of users toward using this product.
methodsThe study was organized into three phases: need analysis, design and implementation, and final evaluation. The aim of the need analysis phase was to investigate the questioning behavior of the patient in the real-world context. The design and implementation phase consisted of four stages: determining the minimum dataset for diabetes medical records, collecting and validating content, designing and implementing a diabetes electronic medical record system, and data entry. Evaluating the final system was done based on the constructs of the technology acceptance model in the two dimensions of perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use. A semistructured interview was used for this purpose.
resultsThree main categories were extracted for the patient's perceived usefulness of the system: raising the self-awareness and knowledge of patients, improving their self-care, and improving doctor-patient interaction. Both patients and physicians perceived the personalized sense of information as a unique feature of the application and believed that this feature could have a positive effect on the patient's motivation for learning and using information in practice. Specialists believed that providing personal feedback on the patient's lab test results along with general explanations encourages the patients to read the content more precisely. Moreover, accessing medical records and helpful notes was a new and useful experience for the patients.
conclusionsOne of the key perceived benefits of providing tailored information in the context of medical records was raising patient awareness and knowledge. The results obtained from field observations and interviews have shown that patients were ready to accept the system and had a positive attitude when it was put into practice. The findings related to user attitude can be used as a guideline to design the next phase of the research (ie, investigation of system effectiveness on patient outcomes).
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.