ArticleBMC health services research2023
Understanding the Cures Act Information Blocking Rule in cancer care: a mixed methods exploration of patient and clinician perspectives and recommendations for policy makers.
Article in BMC health services research, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Patient Perspectives on Electronic Communication of Cancer Diagnoses.JAMA network open · 2026Article
- Patients' and Providers' Preferences and Perceptions for Imaging Information for Patients: Cross-Sectional Survey Study.Journal of participatory medicine · 2025Article
- Inpatient and Outpatient Radiology Report Access After the 21st Century Cures Act.JAMA network open · 2025Article
- Factors Associated With Portal and Telehealth Uptake and Use in a Minoritized, Low-Income Community: Mixed Methods Study.JMIR formative research · 2025Article
- Patient's Information Needs and Understanding When Reading Anatomic Pathology Reports in Patient Portals.ACI open · 2025Article
- Navigating the impact of the 21st-Century Cures Act Final Rule: A national cross-sectional survey of US genetic counselors.Journal of genetic counseling · 2025Article
- "Everything is electronic health record-driven": the role of the electronic health record in the emergency department diagnostic process.JAMIA open · 2025Article
- Interpretation of immediately released health information: Informing patient medical education in breast oncology.American journal of surgery · 2025Article
- 'It Just Makes Sense to Me': A qualitative study exploring patient decision-making and experiences with prostate MRI during active surveillance for prostate cancer.BJUI compass · 2024Article
- Information transparency with immediate release: Oncology clinician and patient perceptions.American journal of surgery · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe 21
methodsWe conducted a convergent parallel mixed methods study to understand patient and clinician reactions to the Information Blocking Rule in cancer care and what they would like policy makers to consider. Twenty-nine patients and 29 clinicians completed interviews and surveys. Inductive thematic analysis was used to analyze the interviews. Interview and survey data were analyzed separately, then linked to generate a full interpretation of the results.
resultsOverall, patients felt more positive about the policy than clinicians. Patients wanted policy makers to understand that patients are unique, and they want to individualize their preferences for receiving health information with their clinicians. Clinicians highlighted the uniqueness of cancer care, due to the highly sensitive information that is shared. Both patients and clinicians were concerned about the impact on clinician workload and stress. Both expressed an urgent need for tailoring implementation of the policy to avoid unintended harm and distress for patients.
conclusionsOur findings provide suggestions for optimizing the implementation of this policy in cancer care. Dissemination strategies to better inform the public about the policy and improve clinician understanding and support are recommended. Patients who have serious illness or diagnoses such as cancer and their clinicians should be included when developing and enacting policies that could have a significant impact on their well-being. Patients with cancer and their cancer care teams want the ability to tailor information release based on individual preferences and goals. Understanding how to tailor implementation of the Information Blocking Rule is essential for retaining its benefits and minimizing unintended harm for patients with cancer.
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.