ArticleJAMIA open2019
Consumer perceptions of health IT utilization and benefits.
Article in JAMIA open, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Health Information Exchange: Contributions from 2023.Yearbook of medical informatics · 2024Pooled it
- Health Information Exchange as a Strategy for Advancing the Modernization of Healthcare Ecosystem in the Emirate of Dubai.Advances in health information science and practice · 2025Article
- User perceptions about sharing exposure notification information for communicable diseases.Frontiers in digital health · 2022Article
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 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThe objective of this article is to examine consumer perceptions of health information technology (health IT) utilization and benefits through an integrated conceptual framework. MATERIALS AND
methodsThis article employs an integrated conceptual framework to examine consumer perceptions of health IT. A consumer survey yielded 1125 completed responses. A factor-based scale was developed for each sub-construct. Bivariate analysis using χ
resultsResults indicate that respondents whose physicians used an EHR system were significantly more likely to agree that there was a perceived benefit with HIE and to care provided; that the patient should have control over the record; that they trust the physician and security of the medical information; that they understand the need for HIE, and that HIE must be easy to use. DISCUSSION: The results suggest that consumers who have experienced the use of one technology in the healthcare setting can recognize the potential benefit of another technology. Race/ethnicity, gender, and education played some role in respondents' views of EHRs and HIE, more specifically, non-Hispanic African American participants indicated lower levels of trust in HIE when compared with non-Hispanic Whites.
conclusionThis cross-sectional survey indicated that physician use of EHRs significantly increases the odds of consumers' seeing perceived benefits of HIE and understanding the need for HIE.
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.