ArticleBMC health services research2024
How do opt-in versus opt-out settings nudge patients toward electronic health record adoption? An exploratory study of facilitators and barriers in Austria and France.
Article in BMC health services research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
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
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Development and Psychometric Validation of a Usability Instrument Based on ISO 25010 for Electronic Health Record Systems in Peruvian Health Care Settings: Methodological Study.JMIR human factors · 2026Article
- Usage and Perceptions of Electronic Patient Records Experienced by Users and Nonusers in the Canton of Vaud, Switzerland: Mixed Methods Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Patient Perceptions of Blockchain-Based Health Information Exchange: User-Centered Design Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Perspectives of Older Adults on Assistive Technology: Qualitative Study.JMIR human factors · 2025Article
- Determinants of consent for electronic health information exchange: an observational retrospective study.Health research policy and systems · 2025Observational
- Consumer perspectives on the national electronic health record and barriers to its adoption in Germany: does health policy require a change in communication?BMC health services research · 2025Observational
- Citizen Views on an Opt-Out Approach to National Electronic Health Records in Germany: A Small-Scale Qualitative Study.International journal of public health · 2024Article
- Understanding public trust in national electronic health record systems: A multi-national qualitative research study.Digital healthArticle
- Article
- A public value-based model to understand patients' adoption of eHealth: Theoretical underpinnings and empirical application.Digital healthArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundElectronic health records (EHR) are becoming an integral part of the health system in many developed countries, though implementations and settings vary across countries. Some countries have adopted an opt-out policy, in which patients are enrolled in the EHR system following a default nudge, while others have applied an opt-in policy, where patients have to take action to opt into the system. While opt-in systems may exhibit lower levels of active user requests for access, this contrasts with opt-out systems where a notable percentage of users may passively retain access. Thus, our research endeavor aims to explore facilitators and barriers that contribute to explaining EHR usage (i.e., actively accessing the EHR system) in two countries with either an opt-in or opt-out setting, exemplified by France and Austria.
methodsA qualitative exploratory approach using a semi-structured interview guideline was undertaken in both countries: 1) In Austria, with four homogenously composed group discussions, and 2) in France, with 19 single patient interviews. The data were collected from October 2020 to January 2021.
resultsInfluencing factors were categorized into twelve subcategories. Patients have similar experiences in both countries with regard to all facilitating categories, for instance, the role of health providers, awareness of EHR and social norms. However, we highlighted important differences between the two systems regarding hurdles impeding EHR usage, namely, a lack of communication as well as transparency or information security about EHR.
conclusionImplementing additional safeguards to enhance privacy protection and supporting patients to improve their digital ability may help to diminish the perception of EHR-induced barriers and improve patients' health and commitment in the long term. PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS: Understanding the differences and similarities will help to develop practical implications to tackle the problem of low EHR usage rates in the long run. This problem is prevalent in countries with both types of EHR default settings.
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.