Perspectives on Swedish Regulations for Online Record Access Among Adolescents With Serious Health Issues and Their Parents: Mixed Methods Study
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: With the increasing implementation of patient online record access (ORA), various approaches to access to minors' electronic health records have been adopted globally. In Sweden, the current regulatory framework restricts ORA for minors and their guardians when the minor is aged between 13 and 15 years. Families of adolescents with complex health care needs often desire health information to manage their child's care and involve them in their care. However, the perspectives of adolescents with serious health issues and their parents have not been studied. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to qualitatively and quantitatively investigate the perceived benefits and risks of ORA and the awareness of and views on ORA regulations among adolescents with serious health issues and their parents in Sweden. METHODS: We used a convergent mixed methods (qualitative and quantitative) design, consisting of a survey and semistructured individual interviews with adolescents with serious health issues (aged 13-18 y) and their parents. Participants were recruited via social media and in clinics. Quantitative data were presented descriptively. Interviews were audio recorded, transcribed, and analyzed using inductive thematic content analysis. RESULTS: The survey population included 88 individuals (adolescents: n=31, 35%; parents: n=57, 65%). Interviews were completed by 8 (26%) of the 31 adolescents and 17 (30%) of the 57 parents. The mean age of the surveyed adolescents was 16 (SD 1.458) years, and most of the parents (29/57, 51%) were aged 45 to 54 years. The surveys indicated that most of the parents (51/56, 91%) were critical of the access gap, and most of the adolescents (20/31, 65%) were unaware of the age at which they could gain access. In the interviews, adolescents and parents identified benefits related to ORA that were categorized into 6 themes (empowering adolescents, improved emotional state, enhanced documentation accuracy, improved partnership and communication, supported parental care management, and better prepared for appointments) and risks related to ORA that were categorized into 4 themes (emotional distress and confusion, threatened confidentiality, increased burden, and low usability). Adolescents' and parents' views on ORA regulations were categorized into 3 themes (challenges of the access gap, balancing respect for autonomy and support, and suggested regulatory change). CONCLUSIONS: In Sweden, ORA regulations and a lack of available information cause significant inconvenience for adolescents with serious health issues and their parents. Views on access age limits differed, with adolescents expressing their perceived need for independent access, while parents exhibited concerns about adolescents having ORA. The findings indicated the importance of increased education, dialogue, and flexibility to uphold confidential and consistent delivery of adolescent health care. Further exploration is needed to understand the experiences of adolescents and parents in diverse clinical and geographic contexts, as well as the perspectives of pediatric health care professionals on restrictive ORA regulations.
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 machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,010 | 0,012 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Communication savante | 0,003 | 0,002 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,002 | 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 source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), 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 ».