ArticlePrimary health care research & development2026
Patient and caregiver use of patient portal features in primary care: a cross-sectional survey study of Ontarians.
Article in Primary health care research & development, 2026. 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPatient portals (PPs) are digital healthcare programs providing patients with access to their electronic health records with features aiding patients in managing their care. Although PPs are now widely used in primary care (PC), the desirability of its features is less known.
aimThis study aims to describe the current and anticipated use of PP features and the socio-demographic profile of PP users accessing these features.
methodsA cross-sectional survey of patient and caregiver experiences with virtual care in PC in Ontario, Canada, was conducted from December 2022 to March 2023. A survey section captured use/anticipated use of PP features: 'communicating with practice', 'viewing records', 'entering record information', 'receiving practice information', and 'scheduling appointments'. We report on respondents with/without PP access and their use/anticipated use of PP features, and analyzed associations between respondent socio-demographic data and the current use of a number of PP features using Pearson chi-square test.
findingsA total of 970 responses (743 patients (P) and 227 caregivers (C)) were obtained with respondents having PP access (P:57%; C:62%) and indicating using all (P: 43%; C:45%), some (P:55%; C:52%), or no (P: 2%; C:4%) PP features. For those with PP access, age (65+ years (14%) compared to <65 years (1%)), employment status (unemployed (6%) compared to employed (1%)), and language at home (non-English (9%) compared to English (1%)) were significantly associated with not using any PP features (percentages represent those not using any PP feature). Our findings provide insights into equity aspects to be considered for future PP implementation.
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.