Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32442148›Full record

ArticleJMIR formative research2020

Patient Perception of Plain-Language Medical Notes Generated Using Artificial Intelligence Software: Pilot Mixed-Methods Study.

Sandeep Bala, Angela Keniston, Marisha Burden

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR formative research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07602725 (Patient Experience and Trust When Viewing Original Medical Notes Versus Large Language Model), which is not on this map. Cited by 30 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
30citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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.

NCT07602725 nanot yet recruitingnot on this mapstarted 2026, after this paper: background citation

Patient Experience and Trust When Viewing Original Medical Notes Versus Large Language Model (LLM)-Generated Plain Language Summaries

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity of Texas at AustinRan2026 to 2027Enrolled135ConditionsMusculoskeletal Disease, Orthopedic PatientsArmsLLM-Generated Medical Note, Control (Original Medical Note)
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

30 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Caught in the Web of Words: Do LLMs Fall for Spin in Medical Literature?Proceedings of machine learning research · 2025
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

3 authors.

Sandeep BalaCollege of Medicine, University of Central Florida, Orlando, FL, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4659-978X
Angela KenistonDivision of Hospital Medicine, University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, CO, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1399-2881
Marisha BurdenDivision of Hospital Medicine, University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, CO, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8262-3994

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundClinicians' time with patients has become increasingly limited due to regulatory burden, documentation and billing, administrative responsibilities, and market forces. These factors limit clinicians' time to deliver thorough explanations to patients. OpenNotes began as a research initiative exploring the ability of sharing medical notes with patients to help patients understand their health care. Providing patients access to their medical notes has been shown to have many benefits, including improved patient satisfaction and clinical outcomes. OpenNotes has since evolved into a national movement that helps clinicians share notes with patients. However, a significant barrier to the widespread adoption of OpenNotes has been clinicians' concerns that OpenNotes may cost additional time to correct patient confusion over medical language. Recent advances in artificial intelligence (AI) technology may help resolve this concern by converting medical notes to plain language with minimal time required of clinicians.

objectiveThis pilot study assesses patient comprehension and perceived benefits, concerns, and insights regarding an AI-simplified note through comprehension questions and guided interview.

methodsSynthea, a synthetic patient generator, was used to generate a standardized medical-language patient note which was then simplified using AI software. A multiple-choice comprehension assessment questionnaire was drafted with physician input. Study participants were recruited from inpatients at the University of Colorado Hospital. Participants were randomly assigned to be tested for their comprehension of the standardized medical-language version or AI-generated plain-language version of the patient note. Following this, participants reviewed the opposite version of the note and participated in a guided interview. A Student t test was performed to assess for differences in comprehension assessment scores between plain-language and medical-language note groups. Multivariate modeling was performed to assess the impact of demographic variables on comprehension. Interview responses were thematically analyzed.

resultsTwenty patients agreed to participate. The mean number of comprehension assessment questions answered correctly was found to be higher in the plain-language group compared with the medical-language group; however, the Student t test was found to be underpowered to determine if this was significant. Age, ethnicity, and health literacy were found to have a significant impact on comprehension scores by multivariate modeling. Thematic analysis of guided interviews highlighted patients' perceived benefits, concerns, and suggestions regarding such notes. Major themes of benefits were that simplified plain-language notes may (1) be more useable than unsimplified medical-language notes, (2) improve the patient-clinician relationship, and (3) empower patients through an enhanced understanding of their health care.

conclusionsAI software may translate medical notes into plain-language notes that are perceived as beneficial by patients. Limitations included sample size, inpatient-only setting, and possible confounding factors. Larger studies are needed to assess comprehension. Insight from patient responses to guided interviews can guide the future study and development of this technology.

Indexed as

artificial intelligencenatural language processingOpen NotesOpenNotespatient educationpatient-physician relationshipplain-language notessimplified notes

Identifiers

PMID32442148
PMCPMC7305564

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.