ArticleJAMIA open2025
Enhancing patient engagement and understanding: is providing direct access to laboratory results through patient portals adequate?
Article in JAMIA open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Patient Experiences With Online Laboratory Test Presentations From Access to Activation: Systematic Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Pooled it
- Patient Viewing and Comprehension of Immediately Released Test Results.JAMA network open · 2026Article
- Clinical Digital Health Engagement and Psychological Distress Among Adults.JAMA network open · 2026Article
- Making non-emergent abnormal results actionable: a short-term longitudinal qualitative study in two hospital-affiliated health examination centers in China.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Clinician Perspectives on AI-Generated Drafts of Patient Test Result Explanations.JAMA network open · 2025Article
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
Abstract
Objectives: To explore patients' use of patient portals to access lab test results, their comprehension of lab test data, and factors associated with these. Materials and Methods: An online survey was administered to 276 adults 18+ years. Multivariate logistic regression was used to determine factors associated with patient portal use to view lab test results and lab test comprehension. Results: The sample was predominantly White (72.5%), female (55.4%), with mean age 50.7 ± 15.5 years. Overall, participants had low numeracy (10.79 ± 2.71) and eHealth literacy skills (23.91 ± 5.29), and moderate lab test comprehension scores (18 ± 2.3). White participants with greater eHealth literacy were more likely to access lab test results via patient portals, whereas those with a college education were less likely to do so (χ Discussion: The findings shed light on the experiences and needs of different user groups that must be addressed to enhance their ability to effectively use patient portals for obtaining lab test results. Conclusion: More research is needed to determine patient barriers to comprehending lab test results online and to develop tailored strategies to improve patients' self-efficacy to meaningfully use medical information in patient portals.
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.