ArticleTranslational behavioral medicine2019
OpenNotes in oncology: oncologists' perceptions and a baseline of the content and style of their clinician notes.
Article in Translational behavioral medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- Effect of Notes' Access and Complexity on OpenNotes' Utility.Applied clinical informatics · 2022Trial
- Changes in Documentation After Implementing Open Notes in Mental Health Care: Pre-Post Mixed Methods Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Article
- A Scoping Review of Methodological Approaches to Detect Bias in the Electronic Health Record.Stigma and health · 2025Article
- Impact of Patient Online Record Access on Documentation: Scoping Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Article
- Identifying stigmatizing language in clinical documentation: A scoping review of emerging literature.PloS one · 2024Article
- Changes in Documentation Due to Patient Access to Electronic Health Records: Protocol for a Scoping Review.JMIR research protocols · 2023Article
- Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Patient Preferences and Decision Making for Symptomatic Urolithiasis.Journal of endourology · 2021Article
- Building the evidence-base to reduce electronic health record-related clinician burden.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2021Article
- Patient Perception of Plain-Language Medical Notes Generated Using Artificial Intelligence Software: Pilot Mixed-Methods Study.JMIR formative research · 2020Article
- Understanding Patient Anxieties in the Social Media Era: Qualitative Analysis and Natural Language Processing of an Online Male Infertility Community.Journal of medical Internet research · 2020Article
- Patient access to clinical notes in oncology: A mixed method analysis of oncologists' attitudes and linguistic characteristics towards notes.Patient education and counseling · 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Patients' ability to access their provider's clinical notes (OpenNotes) has been well received and has led to greater transparency in health systems. However, the majority of this research has occurred in primary care, and little is known about how patients' access to notes is used in oncology. This study aims to understand oncologists' perceptions of OpenNotes, while also establishing a baseline of the linguistic characteristics and patterns used in notes. Data from 13 in-depth, semistructured interviews with oncologists were thematically analyzed. In addition, the Linguistic Inquiry and Word Count (LIWC) program evaluated over 200 clinician notes, measuring variables encompassing emotions, thinking styles, social concerns, and parts of speech. Analysis from LIWC revealed that notes contained negative emotional tone, low authenticity, high clout, and high analytical writing. Oncologists' use of stigmatized and sensitive words, such as "obese" and "distress," was mainly absent. Themes from interviews revealed that oncologists were uncertain about patients' access to their notes and may edit their notes to avoid problematic terminology. Despite their reluctance to embrace OpenNotes, they envisioned opportunities for an improved patient-provider relationship due to patients initiating interactions from viewing notes. Oncologists believe notes are not intended for patients and altering their content may compromise the integrity of the note. This study established a baseline for further study to compare notes pre-implementation to post-implementation. Further analysis will clarify whether oncologists are altering the style and content of their notes and determine the presence of patient-centered language.
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.