ArticleJournal of medical Internet research2018
Enhancing Privacy Controls for Patients via a Selective Authentic Electronic Health Record Exchange Service: Qualitative Study of Perspectives by Medical Professionals and Patients.
Article in Journal of medical Internet research, 2018. 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, 29 citations in OpenAlex.
- Nursing Students' Perception of and Readiness for Artificial Intelligence in Saudi Arabia.Nursing open · 2025Article
- Trust and Health Information Exchanges: Qualitative Analysis of the Intent to Share Personal Health Information.Journal of medical Internet research · 2023Article
- Perspectives of patients with colorectal cancer liver metastases on e-consultation in transmural care: a qualitative study : Is privacy really an issue?BMC health services research · 2023Article
- Review
- Operating room nurses' experience about patient cares for laparotomy surgeries: A phenomenological study.Journal of family medicine and primary care · 2022Article
- Machine Learning-Based Analysis of Encrypted Medical Data in the Cloud: Qualitative Study of Expert Stakeholders' Perspectives.JMIR human factors · 2021Article
- Privacy of electronic health records: a review of the literature.The journal of the Canadian Health Libraries Association · 2021Review
- Electronic Health Interventions in the Case of Multiple Sclerosis: From Theory to Practice.Brain sciences · 2021Review
- Human-Computer Interaction, Ethics, and Biomedical Informatics.Yearbook of medical informatics · 2020Review
- Article
- Understanding public trust in national electronic health record systems: A multi-national qualitative research study.Digital healthArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPatients' privacy is regarded as essential for the patient-doctor relationship. One example of a privacy-enhancing technology for user-controlled data minimization on content level is a redactable signature. It enables users to redact personal information from signed documents while preserving the validity of the signature, and thus the authenticity of the document. In this study, we present end users' evaluations of a Cloud-based selective authentic electronic health record (EHR) exchange service (SAE-service) in an electronic health use case. In the use case scenario, patients were given control to redact specified information fields in their EHR, which were signed by their doctors with a redactable signature and transferred to them into a Cloud platform. They can then selectively disclose the remaining information in the EHR, which still bears the valid digital signature, to third parties of their choice.
objectiveThis study aimed to explore the perceptions, attitudes, and mental models concerning the SAE-service of 2 user roles: signers (medical professionals) and redactors (patients with different technical knowledge) in Germany and Sweden. Another objective was to elicit usability requirements for this service based on the analysis of our investigation.
methodsWe chose empirical qualitative methods to address our research objective. Designs of mock-ups for the service were used as part of our user-centered design approach in our studies with test participants from Germany and Sweden. A total of 13 individual walk-throughs or interviews were conducted with medical staff to investigate the EHR signers' perspectives. Moreover, 5 group walk-throughs in focus groups sessions with (N=32) prospective patients with different technical knowledge to investigate redactor's perspective of EHR data redaction control were used.
resultsWe found that our study participants had correct mental models with regard to the redaction process. Users with some technical models lacked trust in the validity of the doctor's signature on the redacted documents. Main results to be considered are the requirements concerning the accountability of the patients' redactions and the design of redaction templates for guidance and control.
conclusionsFor the SAE-service to be means for enhancing patient control and privacy, the diverse usability and trust factors of different user groups should be considered.
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.