Cited by 573Electronic Health Records SystemsMobile Health and mHealth ApplicationsHealth Literacy and Information Accessibility

Personal health records: a scoping review

Open access
Archer, N, Fevrier-Thomas, U, Lokker, C, McKibbon, K A, Straus, S E·2011·Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association

Abstract

Electronic personal health record systems (PHRs) support patient centered healthcare by making medical records and other relevant information accessible to patients, thus assisting patients in health self-management. We reviewed the literature on PHRs including design, functionality, implementation, applications, outcomes, and benefits. We found that, because primary care physicians play a key role in patient health, PHRs are likely to be linked to physician electronic medical record systems, so PHR adoption is dependent on growth in electronic medical record adoption. Many PHR systems are physician-oriented, and do not include patient-oriented functionalities. These must be provided to support self-management and disease prevention if improvements in health outcomes are to be expected. Differences in patient motivation to use PHRs exist, but an overall low adoption rate is to be expected, except for the disabled, chronically ill, or caregivers for the elderly. Finally, trials of PHR effectiveness and sustainability for patient self-management are needed.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1136/amiajnl-2011-000105

Cites

100 of 100 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 4

  1. Demiris G, Afrin LB, Speedie S, et al. Patient-centered applications: use of information technology to promote disease management and wellness. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2008;15:8e13.
  2. Hartvigsen G, Arsand E, Botsis T, et al. Reusing patient data to enhance patient empowerment and electronic disease surveillance. J Info Technol Healthc 2009;7:4e12.
  3. Zeidenberg J. Slowly, in some jurisdictions, progress is made on interoperability. Can Healthc Technol 2010;15(5):16.
  4. Rogers EM. Diffusion of Innovations. 5th edn. New York, NY: Free Press, 2005.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Archer, N., Fevrier-Thomas, U., Lokker, C., McKibbon, K. A., & Straus, S. E.
Affiliations
  • McMaster University (CA)
  • University of Toronto (CA)
Corresponding author
Archer, N
Venue
Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association
Published
2011-07
Volume
18
Issue
4
Pages
515-522
ISSN
  • 1067-5027 (ISSN-L)
  • 1527-974X
OpenAlex
W2144892760
Cited by
573
References
100
Citations by year
2026: 9 · 2025: 18 · 2024: 16 · 2023: 22 · 2022: 37 · 2021: 42 · 2020: 36 · 2019: 47 · 2018: 62 · 2017: 51 · 2016: 43 · 2015: 59 · 2014: 52 · 2013: 47 · 2012: 31
FWCI
6.44
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Canadian Institutes of Health Research
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Electronic Health Records Systems
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Mobile Health and mHealth Applications
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Literacy and Information Accessibility
Keywords
personal health records, patient-centered care, health self-management, electronic health records, patient motivation, chronic disease, caregivers, disabled patients, health outcomes
MeSH terms
Canada, Humans, Outcome and Process Assessment, Health Care, Patient Acceptance of Health Care, Practice Patterns, Physicians', United States, User-Computer Interface, Patient Satisfaction, Health Records, Personal, Electronic Health Records

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review