Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42475552›Full record

ArticleJMIR formative research2026

Defining and Assessing Empathic Communication in Patient Portal Secure Messages: Adapted Coding Framework Development Study.

Vishal A Shetty, Christina M Gregor, Lorraine D Tusing, Eric A Wright, Airín D Martínez, Brendan T O'Connor, David L Chin

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR formative research, 2026. 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

7 authors.

Vishal A ShettyCenter for Pharmacy Innovation and Outcomes, Geisinger, 100 N Academy Ave, Danville, PA, 17822, United States, 1 413-230-4015.ORCID 0009-0005-8016-0585
Christina M GregorCenter for Pharmacy Innovation and Outcomes, Geisinger, 100 N Academy Ave, Danville, PA, 17822, United States, 1 413-230-4015.ORCID 0009-0002-0141-7441
Lorraine D TusingCenter for Pharmacy Innovation and Outcomes, Geisinger, 100 N Academy Ave, Danville, PA, 17822, United States, 1 413-230-4015.ORCID 0000-0002-9091-8178
Eric A WrightCenter for Pharmacy Innovation and Outcomes, Geisinger, 100 N Academy Ave, Danville, PA, 17822, United States, 1 413-230-4015.ORCID 0000-0003-1721-4104
Airín D MartínezDepartment of Health Promotion and Policy, University of Massachusetts Amherst, Amherst, MA, United States.ORCID 0000-0003-2569-6107
Brendan T O'ConnorManning College of Information and Computer Sciences, University of Massachusetts Amherst, Amherst, MA, United States.ORCID 0000-0001-7502-0573
David L ChinDepartment of Health Promotion and Policy, University of Massachusetts Amherst, Amherst, MA, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-2341-6207

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Empathic communication in the clinical setting has been associated with improved clinical outcomes, decreased anxiety, and increased patient satisfaction, treatment adherence, and trust. Despite the recent growth in patient portal use, the expression of empathic communication through patient portal secure messages is not well understood. Objective: This study aimed to construct a coding schema to define and assess empathic opportunities initiated by patients and primary care clinicians' responses to these opportunities within a patient portal messaging environment. Methods: Data for this study included adult patient secure messages and responding messages from clinicians working in family practice clinics within a regional health care system serving central and northeast Pennsylvania between January 2018 and December 2023. We conducted a manual review of messages using the Empathic Communication Coding System as a guiding framework, which defines empathic opportunities created by patients and corresponding empathic responses by clinicians. We double-coded 500 patient messages for 3 empathic opportunity types: statements of emotion, progress, and challenge. Coding definitions were iteratively updated to describe specific textual cues unique to the patient portal context. This procedure was repeated to code for empathy in clinician responses to empathic opportunities. An additional 100 patient messages were double-coded for interrater reliability testing, and 500 patient messages were single-coded using the finalized coding schema. Results: Among 1100 patient messages coded, 576 (52.4%) included an empathic opportunity. Of these messages, 100 (17.3%) included a statement of emotion, 85 (14.7%) included a statement of progress, and 539 (93.6%) included a statement of challenge. Statements of challenge were primarily characterized by patients explicitly describing physical or mental health issues, a barrier in care, or difficulties in their personal lives. Among the 576 patient messages with empathic opportunities, 446 (77.4%) received at least 1 response from a clinician. Clinicians sent 483 response messages, of which 64 (13.2%) expressed empathy. Conclusions: While patients created empathic opportunities in over half of patient portal secure messages, primary care clinicians infrequently responded with empathy. The findings of this study provide initial evidence of gaps in empathic communication within patient portal secure messages and lay the groundwork for using artificial intelligence models to systematically measure and improve this communication across the patient portal messaging system.

Indexed as

CommunicationEmpathyPatient PortalsAdultFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPennsylvaniaPhysician-Patient Relationscommunicationempathyinternet communicationpatient portalsprimary health caresecure messaging

Identifiers

PMID42475552
PMCPMC13384347

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.