ArticleJMIR human factors2021
User-Centered System Design for Communicating Clinical Laboratory Test Results: Design and Evaluation Study.
Article in JMIR human factors, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 3 of them syntheses 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Patient Experiences With Online Laboratory Test Presentations From Access to Activation: Systematic Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Pooled it
- Communicating blood test results in primary care: a mixed-methods systematic review.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2025Pooled it
- Enhancing Patient Understanding of Laboratory Test Results: Systematic Review of Presentation Formats and Their Impact on Perception, Decision, Action, and Memory.Journal of medical Internet research · 2024Pooled it
- Patient-Reported Experiences With Viewing and Understanding Test Results in Patient Portals: Cross-Sectional Survey Analysis.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Patient and clinician acceptability of automated extraction of social drivers of health from clinical notes in primary care.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2025Article
- Enhancing patient engagement and understanding: is providing direct access to laboratory results through patient portals adequate?JAMIA open · 2025Article
- Repeated Access to Patient Portal While Awaiting Test Results and Patient-Initiated Messaging.JAMA network open · 2025Article
- Optimizing a Patient-Centered Report of Somatic and Germline Genetic Test Results.JCO precision oncology · 2025Article
- Increasing the Impact and Value of Laboratory Medicine Through Effective and AI-Assisted Communication.EJIFCC · 2025Review
- Annotation and Information Extraction of Consumer-Friendly Health Articles for Enhancing Laboratory Test Reporting.AMIA ... Annual Symposium proceedings. AMIA Symposium · 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
4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPersonal clinical data, such as laboratory test results, are increasingly being made available to patients via patient portals. However, laboratory test results are presented in a way that is difficult for patients to interpret and use. Furthermore, the indications of laboratory test results may vary among patients with different characteristics and from different medical contexts. To date, little is known about how to design patient-centered technology to facilitate the interpretation of laboratory test results.
objectiveThe aim of this study is to explore design considerations for supporting patient-centered communication and comprehension of laboratory test results, as well as discussions between patients and health care providers.
methodsWe conducted a user-centered, multicomponent design research consisting of user studies, an iterative prototype design, and pilot user evaluations, to explore design concepts and considerations that are useful for supporting patients in not only viewing but also interpreting and acting upon laboratory test results.
resultsThe user study results informed the iterative design of a system prototype, which had several interactive features: using graphical representations and clear takeaway messages to convey the concerning nature of the results; enabling users to annotate laboratory test reports; clarifying medical jargon using nontechnical verbiage and allowing users to interact with the medical terms (eg, saving, favoriting, or sorting); and providing pertinent and reliable information to help patients comprehend test results within their medical context. The results of a pilot user evaluation with 8 patients showed that the new patient-facing system was perceived as useful in not only presenting laboratory test results to patients in a meaningful way but also facilitating in situ patient-provider interactions.
conclusionsWe draw on our findings to discuss design implications for supporting patient-centered communication of laboratory test results and how to make technology support informative, trustworthy, and empathetic.
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.