ArticleHealth services research and managerial epidemiology
Helpfulness of Clinical Visit Summary Content From Multi-Specialty Care: A Mixed-Methods Assessment.
Article in Health services research and managerial epidemiology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- After-visit and discharge summaries: a scoping review of stakeholder perspectives and experiences.BMC health services research · 2025Article
- Knowledge, attitudes, and practices of pregnant and postpartum women regarding stress urinary incontinence.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- A qualitative study of perceptions of the care pathway for familial hypercholesterolemia: screening, diagnosis, treatment, and family cascade screening.Implementation science communications · 2024Article
- A qualitative assessment of adolescent perspectives on patient education in the outpatient setting.PEC innovation · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveWe surveyed patients who visited multiple outpatient specialty practices to understand what summary content was most helpful with the goal of optimizing meaningful outpatient clinical visit summary content. MATERIALS AND
methodsWe constructed a survey instrument to measure delivery, use, and contents of clinical visit summaries. We surveyed patients who visited with at least 2 different outpatient medical specialties to understand preferences.
resultsMost patients in our sample valued the summary information they received, and retained it as healthcare documentation (84%) and/or quick reference in supporting self-care (70%). Patients most commonly reported that information on results of completed tests (91%) and treatment plan instructions (89%) were very helpful. Additionally, patients expressed the importance of online access to clinical visit summary information. DISCUSSION: Most patients used the clinical visit summary as healthcare documentation, and valued online availability of their summary information. Patients most often reported that information on results of recently completed tests and specific instructions on treatment plan were very helpful. Patients who sought further information after their visit most often looked to a provider and/or online.
conclusionsPatients valued clinical visit summary accessibility and as a reference tool to summarize care and provide next steps. Optimal clinical visit summaries might collate and integrate assessments and recommendations from multiple specialties into coherent care plans for patients.
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.