MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2944358676 · doi:10.2196/11570

Understanding of and Barriers to Electronic Health Record Patient Portal Access in a Culturally Diverse Pediatric Population

2019· article· en· W2944358676 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Daniel Miklin, Sameera S Vangara, Alan M. Delamater, Kenneth W. Goodman

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Medical Informatics · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicElectronic Health Records Systems
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersLeonard M. Miller School of MedicineUniversity of Miami
KeywordsPatient portalElectronic health recordMedicinePopulationHealth careEnvironmental healthPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Electronic health records (EHRs) have become a standard in the health care setting. In an effort to improve health literacy, foster doctor-patient communication, and ease the transition from adolescent to adult care, our institution created a policy that allows patients aged between 13 and 17 years to have EHR portal access. A literature review revealed predictable differences in portal registration among different ethnicities and socioeconomic statuses. Consequently, a cross-sectional survey was developed to investigate barriers to EHR portal access in a sample of culturally diverse adolescents. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to assess for barriers to EHR portal access in a culturally diverse adolescent population. METHODS: A 42-item anonymous survey was completed by 97 adolescents aged between 13 and 18 years, attending general pediatrics clinics. The results were analyzed using descriptive statistics and t tests. RESULTS: The average participant age was 15.5 (SD 1.5) years with 60% (58/97) male and 40% (39/97) female. Participants were 44% (43/97) black, 41% (40/97) Hispanic, 9% (9/97) Caucasian, 3% (3/97) Asian, and 2% (2/97) others. There were statistically significant differences in perceptions of confidentiality in age (13 to 15 years vs 16 to 18 years; P=.001) and insurance status (government vs private; P=.012) but not in gender, ethnicity, or parental education level. Younger adolescents with governmental insurance were more confident in the level of confidentiality with their physician. A total of 94% of participants had heard of the term EHR, but only 55% were familiar with its function. Furthermore, 77% of patients primarily accessed the internet through phones, and 50% of participants knew that patients aged under 18 years could obtain care for mental health, substance abuse, sexual health, and pregnancy. CONCLUSIONS: This research has identified gaps in EHR technology with regard to the pediatric patient population. The results of our survey show that adolescents may have misconceptions regarding the doctor-patient relationship, their ability to obtain care, and the modalities present in an EHR. As technology progresses, it is essential to have a deeper understanding of adolescents' perceptions of confidentiality, technology, and available resources to design an EHR system that encourages patient education and communication while limiting barriers to care.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.068
GPT teacher head0.423
Teacher spread0.355 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations37
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Medical InformaticsSame topicElectronic Health Records SystemsFrench-language works237,207