ArticleJAMA network open2023
Perspectives of Patients About Immediate Access to Test Results Through an Online Patient Portal.
Article in JAMA network open, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 79 papers, 4 of them syntheses 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
79 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Patient Experiences With Online Laboratory Test Presentations From Access to Activation: Systematic Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Pooled it
- Large language models for simplifying radiology reports: a systematic review and meta-analysis of patient, public, and clinician evaluations.The Lancet. Digital health · 2026Pooled it
- Communicating neurological prognosis in the prenatal period: a narrative review and practice guidelines.Pediatric research · 2025Guideline
- Communicating blood test results in primary care: a mixed-methods systematic review.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2025Pooled it
- Trial
- Understanding Patients' Experiences of Digital Ethics in a Digitalised Healthcare System.Nursing open · 2026Article
- Patient Viewing and Comprehension of Immediately Released Test Results.JAMA network open · 2026Article
- Patient-Reported Experiences With Viewing and Understanding Test Results in Patient Portals: Cross-Sectional Survey Analysis.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Natural language processing models for patient-centered summaries of prostatectomy pathology reports.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Configuring large language models to deliver patient-facing explanations of pathology reports.American journal of clinical pathology · 2026Article
- Community perspectives on the return of research results and ownership of data and specimens for brain tumor genomic research.SSM. Qualitative research in health · 2026Article
- Article
- Patient Perspectives on Electronic Communication of Cancer Diagnoses.JAMA network open · 2026Article
- Do you Really Want to Know-Patient and Physician Attitudes of Physicians and English-Proficient Asian Patients toward Direct Release of Radiology Reports in Singapore.Journal of imaging informatics in medicine · 2026Article
- Artificial Intelligence in Urologic Documentation: A Review of Emerging Capabilities and the Ongoing Need for Human Oversight.Current urology reports · 2026Review
- Why Most Australians Consider It Valuable to Find Harmless Abnormalities with Diagnostic Tests: A Mixed-Methods Study.Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making · 2026Article
- Usage and Perceptions of Electronic Patient Records Experienced by Users and Nonusers in the Canton of Vaud, Switzerland: Mixed Methods Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Self-reported comprehension of large language model-generated summaries of lung cancer screening reports: a vignette survey.Radiology advances · 2026Article
- Patients and Caregivers Leveraging AI to Improve Their Health Care Journey: Case Study and Lessons Learned.Journal of participatory medicine · 2026Article
- Providing Beyond Clinic Hours: A Single-center Analysis of Patient Portal Communication in Pediatric Orthopaedic Care.Journal of the Pediatric Orthopaedic Society of North America · 2026Article
19 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Importance: The 21st Century Cures Act Final Rule mandates the immediate electronic availability of test results to patients, likely empowering them to better manage their health. Concerns remain about unintended effects of releasing abnormal test results to patients. Objective: To assess patient and caregiver attitudes and preferences related to receiving immediately released test results through an online patient portal. Design, Setting, and Participants: This large, multisite survey study was conducted at 4 geographically distributed academic medical centers in the US using an instrument adapted from validated surveys. The survey was delivered in May 2022 to adult patients and care partners who had accessed test results via an online patient portal account between April 5, 2021, and April 4, 2022. Exposures: Access to test results via a patient portal between April 5, 2021, and April 4, 2022. Main Outcomes and Measures: Responses to questions related to demographics, test type and result, reaction to result, notification experience and future preferences, and effect on health and well-being were aggregated. To evaluate characteristics associated with patient worry, logistic regression and pooled random-effects models were used to assess level of worry as a function of whether test results were perceived by patients as normal or not normal and whether patients were precounseled. Results: Of 43 380 surveys delivered, there were 8139 respondents (18.8%). Most respondents were female (5129 [63.0%]) and spoke English as their primary language (7690 [94.5%]). The median age was 64 years (IQR, 50-72 years). Most respondents (7520 of 7859 [95.7%]), including 2337 of 2453 individuals (95.3%) who received nonnormal results, preferred to immediately receive test results through the portal. Few respondents (411 of 5473 [7.5%]) reported that reviewing results before they were contacted by a health care practitioner increased worry, though increased worry was more common among respondents who received abnormal results (403 of 2442 [16.5%]) than those whose results were normal (294 of 5918 [5.0%]). The result of the pooled model for worry as a function of test result normality was statistically significant (odds ratio [OR], 2.71; 99% CI, 1.96-3.74), suggesting an association between worry and nonnormal results. The result of the pooled model evaluating the association between worry and precounseling was not significant (OR, 0.70; 99% CI, 0.31-1.59). Conclusions and Relevance: In this multisite survey study of patient attitudes and preferences toward receiving immediately released test results via a patient portal, most respondents preferred to receive test results via the patient portal despite viewing results prior to discussion with a health care professional. This preference persisted among patients with nonnormal results.
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.