ArticleJAMA network open2025
Language Barriers and Access to Hospital Patient Portals in the US.
Article in JAMA network open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Implementation and evaluation of the Routine Assessment and Integration of Screening for Employment (RAISE) program in adults with metastatic breast cancer.Breast cancer research and treatment · 2026Article
- Recruitment Strategies in Registry-Based Observational Research: A Single-Center Experience in the United States from the HeartShare Study.Journal of cardiac failure - intersections · 2026Article
- Barriers and facilitators to, and knowledge of, cord blood banking among pregnant Hispanic women at a university obstetric clinic.Transfusion · 2026Article
- Language barriers in pediatric food allergy care: A single-center study on healthcare disparities.PloS one · 2026Article
- Reimagining Reproductive Health Care for Refugee Women: Integrating Cultural Health Navigators into a Clinical Model.Health equityArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Importance: Although patient portals are becoming important tools in health care delivery, there is a lack of published data on the language accessibility of these digital platforms. Objective: To examine the language accessibility of hospitals' patient portals. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study identified 51 counties in the 17 US states (5 western states, 2 midwestern, 4 northeastern, and 6 southern) with at least 300 000 residents with limited English proficiency. From eligible hospitals with public-facing patient portal platforms, the following data were obtained between September and December 2024: the URL (uniform resource locator) and language accessibility of the patient portal (ie, of the login prompts), portal vendor, and whether the availability of secure portal messaging was explicitly described. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was language accessibility of the portal login page (binary variable: only English vs in at least 2 languages). Multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed to determine factors associated with accessibility of the portal login page in at least 2 languages. Results: Among 514 eligible hospitals (194 [38.0%] in West census region), 511 (99.4%) had public-facing patient portal platforms and were thus included in the analytic cohort; 429 (84.0%) were nonteaching hospitals. Patient portals were accessible in only English at 150 hospitals (29.4%); in English and Spanish only at 305 hospitals (59.7%); and in English, Spanish, and at least 1 additional language at 56 hospitals (10.9%). Only 24 of the 511 hospitals (4.7%) offered portal access in the most common non-English, non-Spanish language of their respective counties. In multivariable logistic regression analysis, teaching hospitals had higher odds of offering portals with multilingual accessibility (odds ratio [OR], 2.21; 95% CI, 1.66-2.95) compared with nonteaching hospitals, while hospitals that used vendors other than Epic MyChart or Cerner had lower odds (OR 0.34; 95% CI, 0.24-0.48 vs Epic). Conclusions and Relevance: In this cross-sectional study of hospitals in 17 states, only a small proportion offered patient portals that were accessible in a non-English, non-Spanish language. As digital health care continues to evolve, prioritizing language accessibility in its design is essential to ensure inclusivity for all patients.
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.