Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33936483›Full record

SynthesisAMIA ... Annual Symposium proceedings. AMIA Symposium2020

What Do Patients and Caregivers Want? A Systematic Review of User Suggestions to Improve Patient Portals.

Tera L Reynolds, Nida Ali, Kai Zheng

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in AMIA ... Annual Symposium proceedings. AMIA Symposium, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing 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

13 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. Catalyzing dementia care through the learning health system and consumer health information technology.Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association · 2023
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. 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

3 authors.

Tera L Reynolds
Nida Ali
Kai Zheng

Funding

University of California Health Participation in the National COVID Cohort Collaborative (N3C)UL1TR001414 · NCATS · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA-IRVINE · PI COOPER, DAN M, VILAIN, ERIC J. · 2015 to 2023
$35.1M
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR001414
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Significant investments have been made in patient portals in order to provide patients with greater access to their medical records, as well as to other services such as secure electronic communication with their healthcare provider(s). Unfortunately, overall, patient adoption and use of patient portals has been lower than expected. According to the user-centered design philosophy, including end-user voices in all stages of the design process is critical to a technology's success. Thus, as a part of a larger systematic review, we examined the patient portal literature and identified 42 studies that reported patient's or their caregiver's suggestions to improve patient portals. The results suggest that patients and caregivers want patient portals to (i) support human connection (e.g., virtual patient-provider interactions), (ii) give patients more control (e.g., over their medical record) and be designedfor the variation in patient and caregiver experiences, and (iii) be innovative (e.g., provide contextualized medical advice).

Indexed as

CaregiversPatient PortalsPatientsElectronic Health RecordsHealth PersonnelHumansPatient Participation

Identifiers

PMID33936483
PMCPMC8075519

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.