Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29788423›Full record

ArticleJournal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA2018

Variability in adolescent portal privacy features: how the unique privacy needs of the adolescent patient create a complex decision-making process.

Marianne Sharko, Lauren Wilcox, Matthew K Hong, Jessica S Ancker

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 31 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
31citing 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

31 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Adolescent Perspectives on the Use of Telemedicine for Confidential Health Care: An Exploratory Mixed-Methods Study.The Journal of adolescent health : official publication of the Society for Adolescent Medicine · 2023
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Telehealth experiences of providers and patients who use augmentative and alternative communication.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2022
    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.

Marianne SharkoDepartment of Healthcare Policy & Research, Division of Health Informatics, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY, USA and.
Lauren WilcoxSchool of Interactive Computing, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Matthew K HongSchool of Interactive Computing, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Jessica S AnckerDepartment of Healthcare Policy & Research, Division of Health Informatics, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY, USA and.

Funding

Improving healthcare quality with user-centric patient portalsK01HS021531 · AHRQ · WEILL MEDICAL COLL OF CORNELL UNIV · PI ANCKER, JESSICA S. · 2013 to 2017
$761k
AHRQ HHS K01 HS021531
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: Medical privacy policies, which are clear-cut for adults and young children, become ambiguous during adolescence. Yet medical organizations must establish unambiguous rules about patient and parental access to electronic patient portals. We conducted a national interview study to characterize the diversity in adolescent portal policies across a range of institutions and determine the factors influencing decisions about these policies. Methods: Within a sampling framework that ensured diversity of geography and medical organization type, we used purposive and snowball sampling to identify key informants. Semi-structured interviews were conducted and analyzed with inductive thematic analysis, followed by a member check. Results: We interviewed informants from 25 medical organizations. Policies established different degrees of adolescent access (from none to partial to complete), access ages (from 10 to 18 years), degrees of parental access, and types of information considered sensitive. Federal and state law did not dominate policy decisions. Other factors in the decision process were: technology capabilities; differing patient population needs; resources; community expectations; balance between information access and privacy; balance between promoting autonomy and promoting family shared decision-making; and tension between teen privacy and parental preferences. Some informants believed that clearer standards would simplify policy-making; others worried that standards could restrict high-quality polices. Conclusions: In the absence of universally accepted standards, medical organizations typically undergo an arduous decision-making process to develop teen portal policies, weighing legal, economic, social, clinical, and technological factors. As a result, portal access policies are highly inconsistent across the United States and within individual states.

Indexed as

ConfidentialityOrganizational PolicyPatient PortalsAdolescentChildDecision MakingElectronic Health RecordsHumansInterviews as TopicParentsUnited States

Identifiers

PMID29788423
PMCPMC7646879

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.