Patterns in Patient Access and Utilization of Online Medical Records: Analysis of MyChart
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Electronic patient portals provide a new method for sharing personal medical information with individual patients. OBJECTIVE: Our aim was to review utilization patterns of the largest online patient portal in Canada's largest city. METHODS: We conducted a 4-year time-trend analysis of aggregated anonymous utilization data of the MyChart patient portal at Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre in Ontario, Canada, from January 1, 2012, through December 31, 2015. Prespecified analyses examined trends related to day (weekend vs weekday), season (July vs January), year (2012 vs 2015), and an extreme adverse weather event (ice storm of December 20-26, 2013). Primary endpoints included three measures of patient portal activity: registrations, logins, and pageviews. RESULTS: We identified 32,325 patients who registered for a MyChart account during the study interval. Time-trend analysis showed no sign of attenuating registrations over time. Logins were frequent, averaged 734 total per day, and showed an increasing trend over time. Pageviews mirrored logins, averaged about 3029 total per day, and equated to about 5 pageviews during the average login. The most popular pageviews were clinical notes, followed by laboratory results and medical imaging reports. All measures of patient activity were lower on weekends compared to weekdays (P<.001) yet showed no significant changes related to seasons or extreme weather. No major security breach, malware attack, or software failure occurred during the study. CONCLUSIONS: Online patient portals can provide a popular and reliable system for distributing personal medical information to active patients and may merit consideration for hospitals.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".