Patient and Family Member Readiness, Needs, and Perceptions of a Mental Health Patient Portal: A Mixed Methods Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Patient portals are a form of technology that supports patients in accessing their health information, and other functions like scheduling appointments. The presence and utilization of patient portals in mental health contexts is relatively new. Despite research existing in the mental health literature that indicates that there may be benefits when patients have access to their mental health notes, there is limited information as to how best to implement portals, and support adoption among patients and their family members. Given this gap in literature, this study aimed to identify patient and family readiness, needs, and perceptions of a mental health patient portal. Surveys were administered to patients (n = 103) and family members (n = 7) either in-person or over the phone by a Peer Support Worker. The sample of participants consisted of patients and family members affiliated with Canada's largest mental health hospital located in Toronto, Ontario. Study results indicated that patients had the highest interest in the following portal functions: scheduling appointments, checking appointment times, and accessing their health record. Both patients and family members expressed their concerns about cybersecurity and potential privacy breaches. The results of this study, as well as the approach, can inform future patient portal planning and implementation activities at other healthcare organizations.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".