ArticleBMC health services research2025
Users' perspectives on a demonstration to increase shared access to older adults' patient portals.
Article in BMC health services research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Patient Portal Use Among Older Adults: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Proceedings. IEEE International Conference on Healthcare Informatics · 2026Article
- Evaluating the Effects of Clinician Prescribing and Implementation Materials on Adoption of Virtual Reality Therapeutics: Randomized Feasibility Pilot Study.JMIR XR and spatial computing · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundMany patient portals allow patients to authorize a care partner to use the portal on their behalf, with evidence suggesting a range of benefits to patients, care partners, and clinicians. Shared or proxy access aligns with patient- and family-centered care and supports care partners' legitimacy and identification by clinicians in patient portal interactions. As shared access uptake remains low, the Coalition for Care Partners ( https://coalitionforcarepartners.org ) and three healthcare delivery organizations co-designed an initiative promoting shared access to the patient portals of older adults.
objectiveTo evaluate an initiative's demonstration through users' perspectives.
designThe 12-month demonstration was launched at five clinics (geriatric oncology, primary care, and geriatric medicine) across the three organizations. Clinicians and staff were interviewed mid- and post-demonstration via focus groups and individually; clinic patients and care partners responded to an anonymous post-demonstration online portal survey.
participantsDemonstration users included established patients from the five clinics and their care partners, as well as clinic physicians, nurses, social workers, care managers, patient-facing staff, administrators, and information technology specialists. APPROACH: We followed the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research to develop interview guides and inform our analysis of the survey's open-ended responses and interview transcripts. We analyzed 11 focus groups, 10 individual interviews, and 392 patients' and 79 care partners' survey responses employing rapid assessment procedures methodology. KEY
resultsThe demonstration was appropriate, useful, routinized in the clinics, and well received by patients and care partners. The demonstration was perceived as undemanding and low-cost, utilizing existing infrastructure and organizational processes. Facilitators included alignments of shared access with clinics' practice and philosophy, organizations' policies, and needs of patients and care partners. Identified barriers included clinicians' competing priorities and patients' and care partners' low awareness and motivation for using shared access.
conclusionsThe Coalition for Care Partners can spread this appropriate, useful, undemanding, and low-cost initiative. Further efforts might be supported by policies that ensure that shared access benefits are bolstered, potential harms of unidentifiable access are emphasized, and registration is conceptualized as an opt-out versus opt-in process.
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.