Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35394512›Full record

ArticleJAMA network open2022

Identifying Accessibility Requests for Patients With Disabilities Through an Electronic Health Record-Based Questionnaire.

Varshini Varadaraj, Xinxing Guo, Nicholas S Reed, Kerry Smith, Michael V Boland, A J Nanayakkara, Bonnielin K Swenor

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JAMA network open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 20% of its field
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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. 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

7 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Varshini VaradarajWilmer Eye Institute, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland.
Xinxing GuoWilmer Eye Institute, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland.
Nicholas S ReedJohns Hopkins Disability Health Research Center, Baltimore, Maryland.
Kerry SmithWilmer Eye Institute, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland.
Michael V BolandFacebook, Global Accessibility Compliance, Washington, DC.
A J NanayakkaraMassachusetts Eye and Ear and Harvard Medical School, Boston.
Bonnielin K SwenorWilmer Eye Institute, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland.
Johns Hopkins Medicine · USJohns Hopkins University · USMassachusetts Eye and Ear Infirmary · USMeta (United States) · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: People with disabilities experience disparities in health care access and outcomes, and inaccessible health care facilities are major barriers to health care access. Methods to collect accessibility request information are needed to improve health care outcomes for patients with disabilities. Objective: To evaluate an electronic health record (EHR)-based questionnaire designed to identify accessibility requests for patients with disabilities at an eye clinic. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional pilot study implemented an EHR questionnaire and prospectively collected data on accessibility requests at a university-based eye clinic. The study included 55 722 patients making appointments at the Johns Hopkins Wilmer Eye Institute from April 1, 2019, to March 31, 2020. Main Outcomes and Measures: The Wilmer Eye Institute staff were trained to assess accessibility requests of patients making appointments in-person or via telephone using a standardized script and entering patient responses into the EHR. Data were later extracted for analysis and used to determine the proportion of patients making eye appointments who reported a disability accessibility request (physical, sensory, or intellectual) during their clinic visit. Results: Accessibility request data were collected from 250 932 patient encounters. Patients had a mean (SD) age of 61.9 (20.6) years; most were women (146 846 [58.5%]) and were White individuals (162 720 [64.9%]). Of these, 23 510 (9.4%) encounters were associated with an accessibility request. The most reported accessibility request was mobility related (18 857 [7.5%]) (needing a cane, crutches, motorized scooter, walker, wheelchair, stretcher, assistance standing, or transport services), followed by sensory-related (2988 [1.2%]) (visual, hearing, or speech impairment), intellectual (353 [0.1%]), and other (1312 [0.5%]) (assistance with filling forms or service animal) requests. Patients with an accessibility request compared with those without, were older (72.6 vs 60.8 years), less likely to be White individuals (59.7% vs 65.4%), and more likely to be women (62.6% vs 58.1%), receiving Medicare (69.6% vs 41.5%), and have vision impairment (41.3% vs 13.6%) (P < .001 for all). Conclusions and Relevance: In this cross-sectional study, a substantial proportion of patients making eye appointments reported having accessibility requests as captured using a new EHR-based questionnaire. Such standardization of data collection for disability-related accessibility requests in EHR is scalable, could be expanded to other clinical settings, and has the potential to improve accessibility of health care interactions for patients with disabilities.

Indexed as

Electronic Health RecordsPersons with DisabilitiesAgedCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHumansMedicarePilot ProjectsSurveys and QuestionnairesUnited States

Identifiers

PMID35394512
PMCPMC8994132
OpenAlexW4223657177

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.