Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 215

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Patient Web Services Integrated with a Shared Medical Record: Patient Use and Satisfaction

Open access
Ralston, J. D., Carrell, D., Reid, R., Anderson, M., Moran, M., Hereford, J.·2007·Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: This study sought to describe the evolution, use, and user satisfaction of a patient Web site providing a shared medical record between patients and health professionals at Group Health Cooperative, a mixed-model health care financing and delivery organization based in Seattle, Washington. DESIGN: This study used a retrospective, serial, cross-sectional study from September 2002 through December 2005 and a mailed satisfaction survey of a random sampling of 2,002 patients. MEASUREMENTS: This study measured the adoption and use of a patient Web site (MyGroupHealth) from September 2002 through December 2005. RESULTS: As of December 2005, 25% (105,047) of all Group Health members had registered and completed an identification verification process enabling them to use all of the available services on MyGroupHealth. Identification verification was more common among patients receiving care in the Integrated Delivery System (33%) compared with patients receiving care in the network (7%). As of December 2005, unique monthly user rates per 1,000 adult members were the highest for review of medical test results (54 of 1,000), medication refills (44 of 1,000), after-visit-summaries (32 of 1,000), and patient-provider clinical messaging (31 of 1,000). The response rate for the patient satisfaction survey was 46% (n = 921); 94% of survey respondents were satisfied or very satisfied with MyGroupHealth overall. Patients reported highest satisfaction (satisfied or very satisfied) for medication refills (96%), patient-provider messaging (93%), and medical test results (86%). CONCLUSION: Use and satisfaction with MyGroupHealth were greatest for accessing services and information involving ongoing, active care and patient-provider communication. Tight integration of Web services with clinical information systems and patient-provider relationships may be important in meeting the needs of patients.

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 · 10.1197/jamia.m2302

Cites

4 of 4 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 4 references

Cited by

See all 215

Metadata

Authors
Ralston, J. D., Carrell, D., Reid, R., Anderson, M., Moran, M., & Hereford, J.
Venue
Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association
Published
2007-11-01
Volume
14
Issue
6
Pages
798-806
ISSN
  • 1067-5027 (ISSN-L)
  • 1527-974X
OpenAlex
W2167435698
Cited by
215
References
4
FWCI
28.55
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

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: Patient Web Services Integrated with a Shared Medical Record: Patient Use and Satisfaction. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1197/jamia.m2302
The paper
Ralston, J. D., Carrell, D., Reid, R., Anderson, M., Moran, M., & Hereford, J. (2007). Patient Web Services Integrated with a Shared Medical Record: Patient Use and Satisfaction. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association. https://doi.org/10.1197/jamia.m2302

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.