Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37639298›Full record

ArticleJMIR research protocols2023

Changes in Documentation Due to Patient Access to Electronic Health Records: Protocol for a Scoping Review.

Eva Meier-Diedrich, Gail Davidge, Maria Hägglund, Anna Kharko, Camilla Lyckblad, Brian McMillan, Charlotte Blease, Julian Schwarz

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR research protocols, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
4.5field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. 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

8 authors at 4 institutions in 4 countries.

Eva Meier-DiedrichBrandenburg Medical School, Immanuel Hospital Rüdersdorf, University Clinic for Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, Rüdersdorf, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3855-4389
Gail DavidgeCentre for Primary Care and Health Services Research, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8241-3428
Maria HägglundDepartment of Women's and Children's Health, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6839-3651
Anna KharkoDepartment of Women's and Children's Health, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0908-6173
Camilla LyckbladDepartment of Archives, Libraries, and Museums, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5892-5725
Brian McMillanCentre for Primary Care and Health Services Research, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0683-3877
Charlotte Blease *Division of General Medicine, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0205-1165
Julian Schwarz *Brandenburg Medical School, Immanuel Hospital Rüdersdorf, University Clinic for Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, Rüdersdorf, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7306-7909
Uppsala University · SEManchester Academic Health Science Centre · GBMedizinische Hochschule Brandenburg Theodor Fontane · DEBeth Israel Deaconess Medical Center · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundInternationally, patient-accessible electronic health records (PAEHRs) are increasingly being implemented. Despite reported benefits to patients, the innovation has prompted concerns among health care professionals (HCPs), including the possibility that access incurs a "dumbing down" of clinical records. Currently, no review has investigated empirical evidence of whether and how documentation changes after introducing PAEHRs.

objectiveThis paper presents the protocol for a scoping review examining potential subjective and objective changes in HCPs documentation after using PAEHRs.

methodsThis scoping review will be carried out based on the framework of Arksey and O'Malley. Several databases will be used to conduct a literature search (APA PsycInfo, CINAHL, PubMed, and Web of Science Core Collection). Authors will participate in screening identified papers to explore the research questions: How do PAEHRs affect HCPs' documentation practices? and What subjective and objective changes to the clinical notes arise after patient access? Only studies that relate to actual use experiences, and not merely prior expectations about PAEHRs, will be selected in the review. Data abstraction will include but will not be limited to publication type, publication year, country, sample characteristics, setting, study aim, research question, and conclusions. The Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool will be used to assess the quality of the studies included.

resultsThe results from this scoping review will be presented as a narrative synthesis structured along the key themes of the corpus of evidence. Additional data will be prepared in charts or tabular format. We anticipate the results to be presented in a scoping review at a later date. They will be disseminated at scientific conferences and through publication in a peer-reviewed journal.

conclusionsThis is the first scoping review that considers potential change in documentation after implementation of PAEHRs. The results can potentially help affirm or refute prior opinions and expectations among various stakeholders about the use of PAEHRs and thereby help to address uncertainties. Results may help to provide guidance to clinicians in writing notes and thus have immediate practical relevance to care. In addition, the review will help to identify any substantive research gaps in this field of research. In the longer term, our findings may contribute to the development of shared documentation guidelines, which in turn are central to improving patient communication and safety. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): PRR1-10.2196/46722.

Indexed as

documentation changeelectronic health recordelectronic portallibrarianlibrary sciencenatural language processingonline record accesspatient accesspatient-accessible electronic health recordpatient-clinician relationshippatient portalreview methodscoping review

Identifiers

PMID37639298
PMCPMC10495856
OpenAlexW4383267912

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.