ArticleJCO clinical cancer informatics2025
Which Patients With Cancer Access Their Clinical Notes? A Disparities Analysis.
Article in JCO clinical cancer informatics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeAccess to clinical notes enhances patient engagement and trust, and the 21st Century Cures Act enabled immediate electronic patient access in April 2021. Yet, technological advances may perpetuate disparities, which remain understudied. Understanding whether inequities in note access exist in oncology would highlight challenges around making this foundational health information available to all patients receiving ongoing, complex medical care. MATERIALS AND
methodsThis study at a high-volume specialty cancer center explored disparities around clinical notes posted to patients' portal accounts from September 1, 2021, to August 31, 2022, and accessed by March 19, 2024. Logistic and Poisson regression were used to identify patient characteristics associated with note access and note opening rates.
resultsThe study included 124,554 patients and 815,104 clinical notes, 43.7% of which (356,290) were accessed. Although modest differences in access rates emerged around sex, age, and marital status, larger disparities appeared for ethnicity, race, and language: Black patients (odds ratio [OR], 0.63 [95% CI, 0.60 to 0.66];
conclusionThis analysis highlighted disparities, by race, ethnicity, and language, in cancer patients' accessing clinical notes. Tailored interventions are crucial to ensure that diverse groups benefit from digital health care resources.
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.