ArticleJournal of medical Internet research2023
Patient Online Record Access in English Primary Care: Qualitative Survey Study of General Practitioners' Views.
Article in Journal of medical Internet research, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
15 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 21 citations in OpenAlex.
- The Impact of Digitalization on European General Practice From the Perspective of General Practitioners: Systematic Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Pooled it
- Assessing the integration of digitalization and AI in general medicine curricula in German-speaking Europe: a comprehensive survey.Medical education online · 2026Article
- Digital first primary care in NHS England: evaluating alignment with patient-centered care and implications for future practice.Frontiers in digital health · 2026Review
- OpenNotes in dentistry as a strategy for patient engagement: opportunities, barriers, and a framework for implementation.Frontiers in oral health · 2026Review
- Balancing efficiency and misinterpretation: general practitioners' perspectives on communicating diagnostic test results in the digital era.Family practice · 2025Article
- Changes in Documentation After Implementing Open Notes in Mental Health Care: Pre-Post Mixed Methods Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Article
- Determining implementation issues of open notes in primary care: a focus group study.BMC primary care · 2025Article
- Experiences of Older Mental Health Patients and Their Care Partners Using a Proxy Account to Access Open Notes: Qualitative Interview Study.JMIR aging · 2025Article
- Impact of Patient Online Record Access on Documentation: Scoping Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Article
- A Nordic Perspective on Patient Online Record Access and the European Health Data Space.Journal of medical Internet research · 2024Article
- Experiences and opinions of general practitioners with patient online record access: an online survey in England.BMJ open · 2024Article
- Open AI meets open notes: surveillance capitalism, patient privacy and online record access.Journal of medical ethics · 2024Article
- The NORDeHEALTH 2022 Patient Survey: Cross-Sectional Study of National Patient Portal Users in Norway, Sweden, Finland, and Estonia.Journal of medical Internet research · 2023Article
- Changes in Documentation Due to Patient Access to Electronic Health Records: Protocol for a Scoping Review.JMIR research protocols · 2023Article
- Affordance trajectories and the usefulness of online records access among older adults in Sweden.Digital healthArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 5 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundIn 2022, NHS England announced plans to ensure that all adult primary care patients in England would have full online access to new data added to their general practitioner (GP) record. However, this plan has not yet been fully implemented. Since April 2020, the GP contract in England has already committed to offering patients full online record access on a prospective basis and on request. However, there has been limited research into UK GPs' experiences and opinions about this practice innovation.
objectiveThis study aimed to explore the experiences and opinions of GPs in England about patients' access to their full web-based health record, including clinicians' free-text summaries of the consultation (so-called "open notes").
methodsIn March 2022, using a convenience sample, we administered a web-based mixed methods survey of 400 GPs in the United Kingdom to explore their experiences and opinions about the impact on patients and GPs' practices to offer patients full online access to their health records. Participants were recruited using the clinician marketing service Doctors.net.uk from registered GPs currently working in England. We conducted a qualitative descriptive analysis of written responses ("comments") to 4 open-ended questions embedded in a web-based questionnaire.
resultsOf 400 GPs, 224 (56%) left comments that were classified into 4 major themes: increased strain on GP practices, the potential to harm patients, changes to documentation, and legal concerns. GPs believed that patient access would lead to extra work for them, reduced efficiency, and increased burnout. The participants also believed that access would increase patient anxiety and incur risks to patient safety. Experienced and perceived documentation changes included reduced candor and changes to record functionality. Anticipated legal concerns encompassed fears about increased litigation risks and lack of legal guidance to GPs about how to manage documentation that would be read by patients and potential third parties.
conclusionsThis study provides timely information on the views of GPs in England regarding patient access to their web-based health records. Overwhelmingly, GPs were skeptical about the benefits of access both for patients and to their practices. These views are similar to those expressed by clinicians in other countries, including Nordic countries and the United States before patient access. The survey was limited by the convenience sample, and it is not possible to infer that our sample was representative of the opinions of GPs in England. More extensive, qualitative research is required to understand the perspectives of patients in England after experiencing access to their web-based records. Finally, further research is needed to explore objective measures of the impact of patient access to their records on health outcomes, clinician workload, and changes to documentation.
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.