ArticleJournal of medical Internet research2018
Use and the Users of a Patient Portal: Cross-Sectional Study.
Article in Journal of medical Internet research, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 59 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
59 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Sociodemographic and Socioeconomic Determinants for the Usage of Digital Patient Portals in Hospitals: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis on the Digital Divide.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Pooled it
- Impact of the Moderating Effect of National Culture on Adoption Intention in Wearable Health Care Devices: Meta-analysis.JMIR mHealth and uHealth · 2022Pooled it
- Patient Portal Engagement in Oncology: Results From the NU IMPACT Study in a Large Health Care System.JCO clinical cancer informatics · 2025Trial
- Comparing Characteristics of Patients Who Connect Their iPhones to an Electronic Health Records System Versus Patients Who Connect Without Personal Devices: Cohort Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2019Trial
- Article
- Mobile phone infrastructure provides evidence of improved HIV viral load monitoring in Malawi.PLOS digital health · 2026Article
- Taming the In-Basket-How Two Simple Tools Reduced Portal Message Volume in an Academic Internal Medicine Clinic.Journal of general internal medicine · 2025Article
- Acceptance, Drivers, and Barriers to Use of mHealth Apps to Improve Quality of Life in Female Patients Affected by Hypothyroidism: Cross-Sectional Study.JMIR formative research · 2025Article
- Patient Portal Registrations at a Swiss Tertiary Referral Hospital Over the Course of the COVID-19 Pandemic: Retrospective Data Analysis.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Observational
- Enhancing patient engagement and understanding: is providing direct access to laboratory results through patient portals adequate?JAMIA open · 2025Article
- Patient Adoption of Digital Use Cases in Family Medicine and a Nuanced Implementation Approach for Family Doctors: Quantitative Web-Based Survey Study.JMIR formative research · 2025Article
- Effect of using client-accessible youth health records on experienced autonomy among parents and adolescents in preventive child healthcare and youth care: A mixed methods intervention study.Journal of child health care : for professionals working with children in the hospital and community · 2025Article
- Digital Information Exchange Between the Public and Researchers in Health Studies: Scoping Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Article
- Understanding Psychosocial Barriers to Healthcare Technology Adoption: A Review of TAM Technology Acceptance Model and Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology and UTAUT Frameworks.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Digital Disparities in Healthcare: A Tale of the Haves and Have-Nots?Journal of patient experience · 2025Article
- Evaluation of Experiences and Attitudes of Patients Towards Patient Portal-Enabled Access to Their Health Information or Medical Records: A Qualitative Grounded Theory Study.Qualitative health research · 2023Article
- Interest in using patient portals among adolescents in mental health care - a cross-sectional study.BMC health services research · 2023Article
- Adult Patients' Experiences of Using a Patient Portal With a Focus on Perceived Benefits and Difficulties, and Perceptions on Privacy and Security: Qualitative Descriptive Study.JMIR human factors · 2023Article
- Improving Patient Access to Hospital Pharmacists Using eConsults: Retrospective Descriptive Study.JMIR formative research · 2023Article
- Impact of a switch to immediate release on the patient viewing of diagnostic test results in an online portal at an academic medical center.Journal of pathology informatics · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPatient portals offer patients access to their medical information and tools to communicate with health care providers. It has been shown that patient portals have the potential to positively impact health outcomes and efficiency of health care. It is therefore important that health care organizations identify the patients who use or do not use the patient portal and explore the reasons in either case. The Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT) is a frequently used theory for explaining the use of information technology. It consists of the following constructs: performance expectancy, effort expectancy, social influence, facilitating conditions, and behavioral intention to use.
objectiveThis study aimed to explore the prevalence of patient portal use and the characteristics of patients who use or do not use a patient portal. The main constructs of UTAUT, together with demographics and disease- and care-related characteristics, have been measured to explore the predictive factors of portal use.
methodsA cross-sectional study was conducted in the outpatient departments for adult patients of a university hospital in the Netherlands. Following outcomes were included: self-reported portal use, characteristics of users such as demographics, disease- and care-related data, eHealth literacy (modified score), and scores of UTAUT constructs. Descriptive analyses and univariate and multivariate logistic regression were also conducted.
resultsIn the analysis, 439 adult patients were included. Furthermore, 32.1% (141/439) identified as being a user of the patient portal; 31.2% (137/439) indicated as nonusers, but being aware of the existence of the portal; and 36.6% (161/439) as being nonusers not aware of the existence of the portal. In the entire study population, the factors of being chronically ill (odds ratio, OR 1.62, 95% CI 1.04-2.52) and eHealth literacy (modified score; OR 1.12, 95% CI 1.07-1.18) best predicted portal use. In users and nonusers who were aware of the portal, UTAUT constructs were added to the multivariate logistic regression, with chronically ill and modified eHealth literacy sum score. Effort expectancy (OR 13.02, 95% CI 5.68-29.87) and performance expectancy (OR 2.84, 95% CI 1.65-4.90) are shown to significantly influence portal use in this group.
conclusionsApproximately one-third of the patients of a university hospital self-reported using the patient portal; most expressed satisfaction. At first sight, being chronically ill and higher scores on the modified eHealth literacy scale explained portal use. Adding UTAUT constructs to the model revealed that effort expectancy (ease of use and knowledge and skills related to portal use) and performance expectancy (perceived usefulness) influenced portal use. Interventions to improve awareness of the portal and eHealth literacy skills of patients and further integration of the patient portal in usual face-to-face care are needed to increase use and potential subsequent patient benefits.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.