ArticleJMIR mental health2022
Behavioral Health Professionals' Perceptions on Patient-Controlled Granular Information Sharing (Part 1): Focus Group Study.
Article in JMIR mental health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Balancing Privacy, Trust, and Equity: Patient Perspectives on Substance Use Disorder Data Sharing.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2025Article
- Advancing Health Equity Through Substance Use Medical Record Data Sharing: Insights from Healthcare Providers.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2025Article
- Physicians' Perspectives on HL7 Information Policy Sensitive Value Set: A Validation Study through Health Concept Categorization.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Behavioral Health Professionals' Perceptions on Patient-Controlled Granular Information Sharing (Part 2): Focus Group Study.JMIR mental health · 2022Article
- Physicians differ in their perceptions of sensitive medical records: Survey and interview study.Health informatics journalArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPatient-controlled granular information sharing (PC-GIS) allows a patient to select specific health information "granules," such as diagnoses and medications; choose with whom the information is shared; and decide how the information can be used. Previous studies suggest that health professionals have mixed or concerned opinions about the process and impact of PC-GIS for care and research. Further understanding of behavioral health professionals' views on PC-GIS are needed for successful implementation and use of this technology.
objectiveThe aim of this study was to evaluate changes in health professionals' opinions on PC-GIS before and after a demonstrative case study.
methodsFour focus groups were conducted at two integrated health care facilities: one serious mental illness facility and one general behavioral health facility. A total of 28 participants were given access to outcomes of a previous study where patients had control over medical record sharing. Participants were surveyed before and after focus groups on their views about PC-GIS. Thematic analysis of focus group output was paired with descriptive statistics and exploratory factor analysis of surveys.
resultsBehavioral health professionals showed a significant opinion shift toward concern after the focus group intervention, specifically on the topics of patient understanding (P=.001), authorized electronic health record access (P=.03), patient-professional relationship (P=.006), patient control acceptance (P<.001), and patient rights (P=.02). Qualitative methodology supported these results. The themes of professional considerations (2234/4025, 55.5% of codes) and necessity of health information (260/766, 33.9%) identified key aspects of PC-GIS concerns.
conclusionsBehavioral health professionals agreed that a trusting patient-professional relationship is integral to the optimal implementation of PC-GIS, but were concerned about the potential negative impacts of PC-GIS on patient safety and quality of 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.