Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29185532›Full record

ArticleNeurology. Clinical practice2017

Sharing notes with patients: A review of current practice and considerations for neurologists.

Melissa M Yu, Allison L Weathers, Allan D Wu, David A Evans

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Neurology. Clinical practice, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

4 authors.

Melissa M YuDepartment of Neurology (MMY), Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX; Department of Neurological Sciences (ALW), Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, IL; Department of Neurology (ADW), David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California Los Angeles; (DAE) Texas Neurology, Dallas.
Allison L WeathersDepartment of Neurology (MMY), Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX; Department of Neurological Sciences (ALW), Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, IL; Department of Neurology (ADW), David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California Los Angeles; (DAE) Texas Neurology, Dallas.
Allan D WuDepartment of Neurology (MMY), Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX; Department of Neurological Sciences (ALW), Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, IL; Department of Neurology (ADW), David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California Los Angeles; (DAE) Texas Neurology, Dallas.
David A EvansDepartment of Neurology (MMY), Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX; Department of Neurological Sciences (ALW), Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, IL; Department of Neurology (ADW), David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California Los Angeles; (DAE) Texas Neurology, Dallas.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Improved patient engagement is a critical consideration in the new payment climate. Releasing progress notes for patients to view may improve patient involvement and engagement in their care. Patients perceive benefit from viewing physician progress notes. As initial studies involved only primary care physicians, specialist physicians may have specific considerations when releasing notes to patients. This article provides a framework for neurologists to implement a note release policy in their practice.

Identifiers

PMID29185532
PMCPMC5669408

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.