Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40598237›Full record

ArticleBMC health services research2025

A patient self-report disability identifier within health service electronic medical records: evaluation of patient, carer and clinician acceptability.

Joanne Rowe, Alexandra Devine, Nicole Merrick, Marie Huska, Kristen Morris, Kath Feely, Ahuva Segal, Louise Mogg, Jenni Medland, Rebecca Jamwal and 4 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

14 authors.

Joanne RoweThe Royal Children's Hospital, 50 Flemington Rd, Parkville, VIC, 3052, Australia. joanne.rowe@rch.org.au.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0002-4752-9406
Alexandra DevineCentre for Health Policy, Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, Faculty of Medicine, Dentistry and Health Sciences, The University of Melbourne, Level 4, 207 Bouverie Street, Carlton, VIC, Australia. alexandra.devine@unimelb.edu.au.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7549-9876
Nicole MerrickDepartment of Paediatrics, Faculty of Medicine, Dentistry and Health Sciences, Healthy Trajectories Child and Youth Disability Research Hub, The University of Melbourne, 50 Flemington Road, Parkville, VIC, 3052, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2773-6128
Marie HuskaCentre for Health Policy, Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, Faculty of Medicine, Dentistry and Health Sciences, The University of Melbourne, Level 4, 207 Bouverie Street, Carlton, VIC, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7021-0527
Kristen MorrisAustin Health, 145 Studley Rd, Heidelberg, VIC, 3084, Australia.
Kath FeelyThe Royal Children's Hospital, 50 Flemington Rd, Parkville, VIC, 3052, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6404-1117
Ahuva SegalThe Centre for Health Analytics - The Royal Children's Hospital, The Murdoch Children's Research Institute, The University of Melbourne, 50 Flemington Road, Parkville, VIC, 3052, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0892-5318
Louise MoggThe Royal Melbourne Hospital, 300 Grattan Street, Parkville, VIC, 3050, Australia.
Jenni MedlandThe Royal Melbourne Hospital, 300 Grattan Street, Parkville, VIC, 3050, Australia.
Rebecca JamwalAustin Health, 145 Studley Rd, Heidelberg, VIC, 3084, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6777-0040
Alison SmithThe Royal Women's Hospital, 20 Flemington Rd, Parkville, VIC, 3050, Australia.
Maricar GleichPeter MacCallum Cancer Centre, 305 Grattan Street, Melbourne, VIC, 3000, Australia.
Jeremiah MunakabayoThe Centre for Health Analytics - The Royal Children's Hospital, The Murdoch Children's Research Institute, The University of Melbourne, 50 Flemington Road, Parkville, VIC, 3052, Australia.
Christine ImmsDepartment of Paediatrics, Faculty of Medicine, Dentistry and Health Sciences, Healthy Trajectories Child and Youth Disability Research Hub, The University of Melbourne, 50 Flemington Road, Parkville, VIC, 3052, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9055-3554

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundA third of the 5.5 million Australians with a disability require adjustments to access healthcare effectively. Ensuring clinicians have timely information about a patient’s disability and care needs can support more responsive care. Disability Identifiers—brief question sets—offer a practical way to capture this information. However, their use in healthcare remains limited. To address this, a group of clinicians, consumers and researchers from five tertiary and quaternary health services in Victoria, Australia, co-designed and implemented a patient self-report Disability Identifier within Electronic Medical Record systems. This paper presents an evaluation of the acceptability of this intervention among patients, carers, and clinicians.

methodsThe Disability Identifier questions were integrated into Electronic Medical Record systems across the five health services in March 2023, with the evaluation period spanning the first nine months of implementation (1st March–30th November 2023). Using a mixed methods convergent parallel design and guided by the Theoretical Framework of Acceptability, we conducted online surveys, interviews, and focus groups with patients, carers, and clinicians. Data analysis explored perspectives and experiences across eight constructs: general acceptability, affective attitude, burden, ethicality, intervention coherence, opportunity costs, self-efficacy, and perceived effectiveness.

resultsSurvey results indicated strong acceptability of the Disability Identifier questions. Interviews with patients and carers reflected generally positive perceptions of the intervention, with many noting that it signalled a commitment by health services to improve care for people with disability. Clinicians emphasised that, with adequate training and resources, this intervention could raise awareness about disability and contribute towards disability-responsive care.

conclusionsIntegrating patient self-reported Disability Identifiers into EMR systems marks a critical step toward improving disability-responsive healthcare. Building trust in Disability Identifiers requires clear communication about their purpose, benefits, and role in improving care while also addressing disability awareness and discrimination in healthcare settings. While continuous evaluation of their use and impact on patient experiences and outcomes is recommended, this research lays the foundation for other jurisdictions to adopt a standardized approach to integrating Disability Identifiers into health data systems. Ultimately, effective use of patient self-report Disability Identifiers has the potential to promote more equitable health outcomes for people with disability.

Indexed as

Attitude of Health PersonnelCaregiversElectronic Health RecordsPersons with DisabilitiesSelf ReportAdultAgedFemaleFocus GroupsHumansInterviews as TopicMaleMiddle AgedSurveys and QuestionnairesVictoriaAcceptabilityCo-designDisabilityDisability dataDisability identifiersElectronic medical recordsHealthcareHealth equityUniversal access

Identifiers

PMID40598237
PMCPMC12210468

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.