Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 173

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Patients' experience with a diabetes support programme based on an interactive electronic medical record: qualitative study

Open access
Ralston, James D, Revere, Debra, Robins, Lynne S, Goldberg, Harold I·2004·BMJ

Abstract

Objective To describe the experiences of patients with type 2 diabetes in a web based disease management programme based on an interactive electronic medical record. Design Qualitative analysis of semistructured interviews with patients enrolled in a diabetes care module that included access to their electronic medical record, secure email, ability to upload blood glucose readings, an education site with endorsed content, and an interactive online diary for entering exercise, diet, and medication. Setting Patients' homes in Washington state, United States. Participants Nine participants aged 45-65 completed interviews before and after they used the programme. Results Six themes emerged: feeling that non-acute concerns are uniquely valued; enhanced sense of security about health and health care; frustration with unmet expectations; feeling more able to manage; valuing feedback; and difficulty fitting the programme into activities of daily life. Three themes—valuing non-acute concerns, feeling secure, and unmet expectations—have particular relevance to the design and use of web based tools for care of patients with diabetes and chronic medical conditions. Conclusion Participants' experiences support further study of open access to the electronic medical record and online communication between patients and their care providers. The development of web based disease management programmes should take into account the specific needs and expectations of patients, and patients and providers should have candid discussions about what web based care can and cannot provide.

Overview

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/bmj.328.7449.1159

Cites

5 of 5 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

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

Self-check

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

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

Citations

Cites

Show all 5 references

Cited by

See all 173

Metadata

Authors
Ralston, J. D., Revere, D., Robins, L. S., & Goldberg, H. I.
Venue
BMJ
Publisher
BMJ
Published
2004-05-13
Volume
328
Issue
7449
Pages
1159
ISSN
  • 0007-1447 (ISSN-L)
  • 0959-8138
  • 1468-5833
OpenAlex
W2086217533
Cited by
173
References
5
FWCI
5.15
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
hybrid

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Patients' experience with a diabetes support programme based on an interactive electronic medical record: qualitative study. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1136/bmj.328.7449.1159
The paper
Ralston, J. D., Revere, D., Robins, L. S., & Goldberg, H. I. (2004). Patients' experience with a diabetes support programme based on an interactive electronic medical record: qualitative study. BMJ. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.328.7449.1159

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.