ArticleJMIR formative research2021
Assessment of Patients' Ability to Review Electronic Health Record Information to Identify Potential Errors: Cross-sectional Web-Based Survey.
Article in JMIR formative research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed.
- Advancing foundational models in digital health technology adoption: A systematic literature review of multidisciplinary factors.PLOS digital health · 2026Article
- Digital Mental Health Through an Intersectional Lens: A Narrative Review.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Article
- Usability and Usefulness of Occupational Health Care Patient Portals: Patient-Based Cross-Sectional Study.JMIR human factors · 2025Article
- The opportunities and uncertainties of clinic visit recording for older adults.Age and ageing · 2025Article
- Patients' Use of Electronic Health Records Facilitates Patient-Centered Communication: Findings From the 2017 Health Information National Trends Survey.Journal of medical Internet research · 2024Article
- Evaluation of Experiences and Attitudes of Patients Towards Patient Portal-Enabled Access to Their Health Information or Medical Records: A Qualitative Grounded Theory Study.Qualitative health research · 2023Article
- Healthcare professionals' knowledge, attitude and its associated factors toward electronic personal health record system in a resource-limited setting: A cross-sectional study.Frontiers in public health · 2023Article
- Patients' Willingness and Ability to Identify and Respond to Errors in Their Personal Health Records: Mixed Methods Analysis of Cross-sectional Survey Data.Journal of medical Internet research · 2022Article
- Electronic Health Records and Heart Failure.Heart failure clinics · 2022Review
- Prevalence and Factors Associated with Patient-Requested Corrections to the Medical Record through Use of a Patient Portal: Findings from a National Survey.Applied clinical informatics · 2022Article
- Determinants of Use of the Care Information Exchange Portal: Cross-sectional Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2021Article
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
backgroundSharing personal health information positively impacts quality of care across several domains, and particularly, safety and patient-centeredness. Patients may identify and flag up inconsistencies in their electronic health records (EHRs), leading to improved information quality and patient safety. However, in order to identify potential errors, patients need to be able to understand the information contained in their EHRs.
objectiveThe aim of this study was to assess patients' perceptions of their ability to understand the information contained in their EHRs and to analyze the main barriers to their understanding. Additionally, the main types of patient-reported errors were characterized.
methodsA cross-sectional web-based survey was undertaken between March 2017 and September 2017. A total of 682 registered users of the Care Information Exchange, a patient portal, with at least one access during the time of the study were invited to complete the survey containing both structured (multiple choice) and unstructured (free text) questions. The survey contained questions on patients' perceived ability to understand their EHR information and therefore, to identify errors. Free-text questions allowed respondents to expand on the reasoning for their structured responses and provide more detail about their perceptions of EHRs and identifying errors within them. Qualitative data were systematically reviewed by 2 independent researchers using the framework analysis method in order to identify emerging themes.
resultsA total of 210 responses were obtained. The majority of the responses (123/210, 58.6%) reported understanding of the information. The main barriers identified were information-related (medical terminology and knowledge and interpretation of test results) and technology-related (user-friendliness of the portal, information display). Inconsistencies relating to incomplete and incorrect information were reported in 12.4% (26/210) of the responses.
conclusionsWhile the majority of the responses affirmed the understanding of the information contained within the EHRs, both technology and information-based barriers persist. There is a potential to improve the system design to better support opportunities for patients to identify errors. This is with the aim of improving the accuracy, quality, and timeliness of the information held in the EHRs and a mechanism to further engage patients in their health care.
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.