Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40720891›Full record

ArticleJMIR formative research2025

Barriers to Patient Portal Adoption Among a Bilingual Patient Population by Analysis of Survey Findings from English- and Spanish-Speaking Patients: Information Needs Study.

Jiahua Yang, Michael Mackert, Daniela De Luca, Sophia Annette Dove

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR formative 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

4 authors.

Jiahua Yang *Stan Richards School of Advertising and Public Relations, University of Texas at Austin, 300 W. Dean Keeton St., Austin, TX, 78712-1069, United States, 1 2106178014.ORCID 0009-0000-6440-3659
Michael Mackert *Stan Richards School of Advertising and Public Relations, University of Texas at Austin, 300 W. Dean Keeton St., Austin, TX, 78712-1069, United States, 1 2106178014.ORCID 0000-0002-1758-5354
Daniela De Luca *Stan Richards School of Advertising and Public Relations, University of Texas at Austin, 300 W. Dean Keeton St., Austin, TX, 78712-1069, United States, 1 2106178014.ORCID 0000-0001-8509-5923
Sophia Annette Dove *Stan Richards School of Advertising and Public Relations, University of Texas at Austin, 300 W. Dean Keeton St., Austin, TX, 78712-1069, United States, 1 2106178014.ORCID 0000-0002-5560-8107

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Despite legislative action, pre-existing barriers continue to prevent patients from using patient portals. Patients, especially older people, people of color, and people with limited English proficiency continue to experience difficulty in adopting patient portals. Objective: The aim of this study was to advance understanding, explore willingness to adopt an electronic portal, and examine differences between language preferences. Methods: English- and Spanish-speaking patients (N=106) were surveyed from a community clinic regarding access to electronic devices and the internet, barriers to using a patient portal, willingness to adopt such a portal, preference mode of communication with health care providers, and preferred features in the current clinic's portal. Linear and logistic regressions were performed to predict the probability that patients would adopt the patient portal. Results: Only 65% (n=69)of participants said they envisioned themselves using a patient portal. English-speaking patients were more willing to exchange electronic information with their health care providers. Spanish-speaking patients reported language as a significant barrier to portal use. A logistic regression revealed that patients with more positive attitudes and higher perceived behavioral control are more likely to sign up and use the patient portal (Nagelkerke R2=.51, classification=90.8%, efficacy B=2.38, Wald-1=5.93, P=.02 and Exp[B]=12.44, attitude B=1.87, Wald=6.45, P=.01, Exp[B]=7.49). Conclusions: Understanding language preference differences while predicting portal use based on attitudes and perceptions empowers patients to have a more meaningful experience with their physician, potentially overcoming low health literacy-related barriers.

Indexed as

Communication BarriersHispanic or LatinoMultilingualismPatient PortalsAdultAgedFemaleHumansLanguageMaleMiddle AgedSurveys and QuestionnairesWhiteEHRselectronic health recordselectronic medical recordsEMRshealth communicationhealth recordspatient access to informationpatient informationpatient portal adoptionpatient portalspatient recordpersonal health recordPHR

Identifiers

PMID40720891
PMCPMC12303557

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.