ArticleNature health2026
Access to care affects electronic health record reliability and AI-driven disease prediction.
Article in Nature health, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Spatial bias in quality of estimated delivery date records in the electronic health record.JAMIA open · 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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Despite well-documented healthcare access disparities, their impact on electronic health record (EHR) reliability and resulting clinical prediction models remains poorly understood. Analyzing 205,186 participants from the All of Us Research Program, we found that participants with cost-constrained or delayed care had worse EHR reliability for 73% of examined medical conditions as measured by participant self-reported conditions, driven in part by lower visit rates. In a type 2 diabetes prediction task, including participant self-reported conditions significantly improved the predictive performance for participants with lower access to care and improved targeting of low access patients who would go on to develop type 2 diabetes. This study demonstrates that healthcare access systematically affects both data quality and clinical prediction performance, suggesting that improving health equity requires addressing both data collection biases and algorithmic limitations. Our findings provide an empirical foundation for developing clinical prediction systems that work effectively for all patients regardless of barriers to access.
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.