ArticleCanadian family physician Medecin de famille canadien2021
Electronic communication between family physicians and patients: Findings from a multisite survey of academic family physicians in Ontario.
Article in Canadian family physician Medecin de famille canadien, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Family physician perspectives on managing indirect patient care activities in the electronic inbox: a systematic mixed studies review.Family practice · 2025Pooled it
- Article
- Uses of Virtual Care in Primary Care: Scoping Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Article
- Understanding inherent influencing factors to digital health adoption in general practices through a mixed-methods analysis.NPJ digital medicine · 2024Article
- Family physician practice patterns during COVID-19 and future intentions: Cross-sectional survey in Ontario, Canada.Canadian family physician Medecin de famille canadien · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo assess the proportion of academic family physicians using e-mail with patients and to explore related attitudes, barriers, and facilitators.
designA 47-item questionnaire was created after a literature review, discussions with study team members, pretesting, and pilot testing. The questionnaire was disseminated electronically from June to August 2017.
settingOntario.
participantsAll family physicians affiliated with the Department of Family and Community Medicine at the University of Toronto.
main outcome measuresPhysician practices using e-mail (including barriers to and facilitators of e-mail use with patients), use of e-mail with other health care providers, use of communication technologies other than e-mail, and demographic and practice information.
resultsA total of 1553 surveys were disseminated and 865 responses received (56% response rate). Overall, 610 respondents met inclusion criteria. Of these respondents, 43% (265 of 610) personally sent e-mails to patients in a typical week. An additional 21% (126 of 610) reported that they did not personally e-mail patients, but their clinic staff did. Patient convenience and a decrease in the need for telephone communication were the most commonly noted reasons for e-mail use. Facilitators of e-mail use included integration with the electronic medical record, enhanced e-mail access control, security features, and financial compensation. Barriers to e-mail use included privacy and security concerns, concerns about inappropriate e-mail use by patients, and the creation of unrealistic expectations about physician availability.
conclusionE-mail use between academic family physicians and patients was found to be much higher than shown in previous studies of Canadian physicians. This finding might have been owing to unique aspects of academic medicine, remuneration via capitation, or other factors. Efforts to increase physician use of e-mail with patients should address concerns related to privacy and security, electronic medical record integration, and financial compensation.
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.