Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33350960›Full record

ArticleJournal of medical Internet research2020

Interrelationships Between Patients' Data Tracking Practices, Data Sharing Practices, and Health Literacy: Onsite Survey Study.

Yuhan Luo, Chi Young Oh, Beth St Jean, Eun Kyoung Choe

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of medical Internet research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing 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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

16 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. Article
  11. Article
  12. Contributing to Accessibility Datasets: Reflections on Sharing Study Data by Blind People.Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems. CHI Conference · 2023
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. 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

4 authors.

Yuhan LuoCollege of Information Studies, University of Maryland, College Park, MD, United States.ORCID 0000-0003-2016-4080
Chi Young OhChicago State University, Chicago, IL, United States.ORCID 0000-0001-9550-2748
Beth St JeanCollege of Information Studies, University of Maryland, College Park, MD, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-9856-2874
Eun Kyoung ChoeCollege of Information Studies, University of Maryland, College Park, MD, United States.ORCID 0000-0001-5038-8320

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAlthough the use of patient-generated data (PGD) in the optimization of patient care shows great promise, little is known about whether patients who track their PGD necessarily share the data with their clinicians. Meanwhile, health literacy-an important construct that captures an individual's ability to manage their health and to engage with their health care providers-has often been neglected in prior studies focused on PGD tracking and sharing. To leverage the full potential of PGD, it is necessary to bridge the gap between patients' data tracking and data sharing practices by first understanding the interrelationships between these practices and the factors contributing to these practices.

objectiveThis study aims to systematically examine the interrelationships between PGD tracking practices, data sharing practices, and health literacy among individual patients.

methodsWe surveyed 109 patients at the time they met with a clinician at a university health center, unlike prior research that often examined patients' retrospective experience after some time had passed since their clinic visit. The survey consisted of 39 questions asking patients about their PGD tracking and sharing practices based on their current clinical encounter. The survey also contained questions related to the participants' health literacy. All the participants completed the survey on a tablet device. The onsite survey study enabled us to collect ecologically valid data based on patients' immediate experiences situated within their clinic visit.

resultsWe found no evidence that tracking PGD was related to self-reports of having sufficient information to manage one's health; however, the number of data types participants tracked positively related to their self-assessed ability to actively engage with health care providers. Participants' data tracking practices and their health literacy did not relate to their data sharing practices; however, their ability to engage with health care providers positively related to their willingness to share their data with clinicians in the future. Participants reported several benefits of, and barriers to, sharing their PGD with clinicians.

conclusionsAlthough tracking PGD could help patients better engage with health care providers, it may not provide patients with sufficient information to manage their health. The gaps between tracking and sharing PGD with health care providers call for efforts to inform patients of how their data relate to their health and to facilitate efficient clinician-patient communication. To realize the full potential of PGD and to promote individuals' health literacy, empowering patients to effectively track and share their PGD is important-both technologies and health care providers can play important roles.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultFemaleHealth LiteracyHumansInformation DisseminationMaleRetrospective StudiesSurveys and QuestionnairesYoung Adultconsumer health informaticsdoctor-patient data sharinghealth literacypatient-generated health dataself-trackingsurveys and questionnaires

Identifiers

PMID33350960
PMCPMC7785405

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.