Examining Whether Patient Portal and Video Visit Use Differs by Race and Ethnicity Among Older Adults in a US Integrated Health Care Delivery System: Cross-Sectional Electronic Health Record and Survey-Based Study
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: Health care systems are increasingly encouraging patients to use patient portals and participate in video visits. However, there is limited information about how portal use differs among older adults. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to understand how patient portal and video visit use differed by age, race, and ethnicity among older adult patients with access to the same digital health resources. METHODS: This cross-sectional study used electronic health record and survey data for adults aged 65 to 85 years who were members of a large Northern California health care delivery system throughout 2019 and 2020. The electronic health record cohort (N=471,152) included 320,686 White, 35,892 Black, 44,922 Latino, 20,786 Chinese, 28,732 Filipino, 8473 South Asian, 6716 Japanese, 2930 Vietnamese, and 2015 Korean adults. Racial and ethnic group and age group (65 to 75 years vs 76 to 85 years) differences in having a patient portal account by December 2020, the performance of 2 portal activities (sending ≥1 message to a clinician in 2019 or 2020 and viewing ≥1 laboratory test result in 2020), and having ≥1 video visit during 2020 were examined. Modified log-Poisson regression was used to examine prevalence ratios for portal and video visit use, comparing racial and ethnic groups to White adults and Asian ethnic groups to Chinese adults after adjusting for sex and age. Data from a 2020 member survey were used to compare internet use factors among 2867 White, 306 Black, 343 Latino, 225 Chinese, and 242 Filipino adults. RESULTS: Black, Latino, and Filipino adults were less likely to have a patient portal account than White adults, and Filipino adults were less likely to have a patient portal account than Chinese adults. Black, Latino, Filipino, Korean, Vietnamese, and South Asian adults were less likely to have sent messages and viewed test results than White adults, while Chinese and Japanese adults' use of these features was similar to that of White adults. Filipino, Vietnamese, and Korean adults were less likely to have performed the aforementioned activities than Chinese adults. Video visit use was lower among Black and Latino adults and higher among Chinese and South Asian adults compared with White adults (aged 76 to 85 years) and lower among Filipino, Korean, and Vietnamese adults compared to Chinese adults. Survey data suggested that underlying differences in internet use may partially explain the lower use of messaging by Black, Latino, and Filipino adults compared with White and Chinese adults. CONCLUSIONS: Patient portal and video visit use differed by race, ethnicity, and age group among older adult patients with access to the same patient portal. Internet use factors may contribute to these differences. Differences in patient portal and video visit use across Asian subgroups underscore the importance of disaggregating use data by Asian ethnicity.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,004 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,002 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».