SynthesisBMJ quality & safety2020
Impact of providing patients access to electronic health records on quality and safety of care: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in BMJ quality & safety, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 55 papers, 6 of them syntheses 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
55 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Impact of online patient access to clinical notes on quality of care: a systematic review.BMJ quality & safety · 2026Pooled it
- Electronic Health Record Interventions to Reduce Risk of Hospital Readmissions: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.JAMA network open · 2025Pooled it
- The Impact of Virtual Consultations on the Quality of Primary Care: Systematic Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2023Pooled it
- eHealth literacy and its associated factors in Ethiopia: Systematic review and meta-analysis.PloS one · 2023Pooled it
- The Impact of Electronic Health Record Interoperability on Safety and Quality of Care in High-Income Countries: Systematic Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2022Pooled it
- Adult patient access to electronic health records.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2021Pooled it
- Impact of GPT-4-Generated Discharge Letters on Patients' Medical Comprehension: Prospective Crossover Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Trial
- Trial
- Medication Safety in India and Southeast Asia: A SWOT Analysis of Policies and Practices.Pharmaceutical medicine · 2026Review
- The impact of remote care on the quality of care of pregnant women with diabetes: a systematic review and meta-analysis.EClinicalMedicine · 2026Article
- Impact of Patient Portals on Asthma and Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease-Related Quality-of-Care Outcomes: Systematic Review.Online journal of public health informatics · 2026Review
- Electronic health records in patient care: strengths, facilitators, challenges, and future directions-a scoping review.BMC health services research · 2026Article
- Finding the sweet spot in green nephrology: the intersection of environmental sustainability and excellence in patient care.Clinical kidney journal · 2026Review
- The impact of remote care on the quality of care of pregnant women with diabetes: a systematic review protocol.Systematic reviews · 2026Article
- Recommendations for sharing cardiovascular implantable electronic device data with patients based on clinician interviews.Heart rhythm O2 · 2026Article
- Integrating clinical decision support systems, nursing vigilance, and physician prescribing patterns to reduce preventable adverse drug events: a structured evidence-based narrative review on human-AI interface in medication safety.Frontiers in digital health · 2026Review
- Empowering patients through clinical notes access: Opportunities, challenges, and the path forward.PLOS digital health · 2025Article
- LLMonFHIR: A Physician-Validated, Large Language Model-Based Mobile Application for Querying Patient Electronic Health Data.JACC. Advances · 2025Article
- Qualitative evaluation of the implementation and national roll-out of the NHS App in England.BMC medicine · 2025Article
- Perceptions of electronic health records by ethnically diverse groups in mental health: A systematic literature review.Global mental health (Cambridge, England) · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo evaluate the impact of sharing electronic health records (EHRs) with patients and map it across six domains of quality of care (ie, patient-centredness, effectiveness, efficiency, timeliness, equity and safety).
designSystematic review and meta-analysis. DATA SOURCES: CINAHL, Cochrane, Embase, HMIC, Medline/PubMed and PsycINFO, from 1997 to 2017. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Randomised trials focusing on adult subjects, testing an intervention consisting of sharing EHRs with patients, and with an outcome in one of the six domains of quality of care. DATA ANALYSIS: The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines were followed. Title and abstract screening were performed by two pairs of investigators and assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool. For each domain, a narrative synthesis of the results was performed, and significant differences in results between low risk and high/unclear risk of bias studies were tested (t-test, p<0.05). Continuous outcomes evaluated in four studies or more (glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c), systolic blood pressure (SBP) and diastolic blood pressure (DBP)) were pooled as weighted mean difference (WMD) using random effects meta-analysis. Sensitivity analyses were performed for low risk of bias studies, and long-term interventions only (lasting more than 12 months).
resultsTwenty studies were included (17 387 participants). The domain most frequently assessed was effectiveness (n=14), and the least were timeliness and equity (n=0). Inconsistent results were found for patient-centredness outcomes (ie, satisfaction, activation, self-efficacy, empowerment or health literacy), with 54.5% of the studies (n=6) demonstrating a beneficial effect. Meta-analyses showed a beneficial effect in effectiveness by reducing absolute values of HbA1c (unit: %; WMD=-0.316; 95% CI -0.540 to -0.093, p=0.005, I DISCUSSION: Our analysis supports that sharing EHRs with patients is effective in reducing HbA1c levels, a major predictor of mortality in type 2 diabetes (mean decrease of -0.405, unit: %) and could improve patient safety. More studies are necessary to enhance meta-analytical power and assess the impact in other domains of care. PROTOCOL REGISTRATION: http://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO (CRD42017070092).
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.