ArticleJournal of medical Internet research2022
Early Adopters of Apple Health Records at a Large Academic Medical Center: Cross-sectional Survey of Users.
Article in Journal of medical Internet research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- A Computationally-guided Qualitative Analysis to Understand User Experiences with Different Types of Mobile Personal Health Records.AMIA ... Annual Symposium proceedings. AMIA Symposium · 2024Article
- A Decentralized Marketplace for Patient-Generated Health Data: Design Science Approach.Journal of medical Internet research · 2023Article
- The Use of a Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) to Predict Patients' Usage of a Personal Health Record System: The Role of Security, Privacy, and Usability.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023Article
- Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMobile applications offer a new approach to personal health records, which are internet-based tools for patients to consolidate and manage their health information. The University of Pennsylvania Health System (UPHS) was one of the first health systems to participate in Apple Health Records (AHR), a prominent example of this new generation of personal health records.
objectiveThis study aimed to characterize early adoption of AHR among UPHS patients and understand user perspectives.
methodsAn email-based survey with fixed answer, Likert scale, and open-ended questions was administered to all UPHS patients using AHR in the first 10 months of enrollment. Survey data linked to the UPHS electronic health record system were used to analyze responses. Multivariable logistic regression modeled the association of patient characteristics with user ratings. Content analysis was used to analyze open-ended questions.
resultsAt the time of the survey, a total of 1458 patients had used AHR at least once. Mean age of AHR users was 47.5 years, 66.3% (967/1458) were male, 70.9% (1033/1458) were white, and 80.8% (1178/1458) had private insurance. Response rate was 26.8% (391/1458); 46.3% (180/389) were very satisfied with AHR, and 67.7% (264/390) described it as very easy to use. The most commonly utilized features were lab results (324/391, 82.9%), clinical vitals (264/391, 67.5%), and medications (253/391, 64.7%). No patient characteristics were associated with reporting high satisfaction or ease of use. The most common reason for using AHR was convenience/ease of use, and 58.2% (160/275) of users reported allowing no other apps to access their health information, citing privacy as one consideration.
conclusionsEarly adopters of AHR were demographically white, male, and privately insured. Convenience was an important facilitator, and users were selective in which apps they allowed to access their health information.
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.