Cited by 68Electronic Health Records SystemsTelemedicine and Telehealth ImplementationHealthcare Systems and Technology

Patient-physician e-mail communication: the kaiser permanente experience

Open access
Baer, David·2011·Journal of Oncology Practice

Abstract

The American Medical Association and American Medical Informatics Association guidelines provide excellent advice to those seeking to incorporate physician-patient e-mail communication into their practices.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1200/jop.2011.000323

Cites

8 of 8 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Baer, D.
Affiliations
University of Wyoming (US)
Corresponding author
Baer, David
Venue
Journal of Oncology Practice
Published
2011-07
Volume
7
Issue
4
Pages
230-233
ISSN
  • 1554-7477 (ISSN-L)
  • 1935-469X
OpenAlex
W2147621655
Cited by
68
References
8
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2024: 5 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 9 · 2013: 11 · 2012: 4
FWCI
12.85
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Oncology Practice (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Electronic Health Records Systems
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Telemedicine and Telehealth Implementation
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Healthcare Systems and Technology
Keywords
secure messaging, patient-physician communication, Kaiser Permanente, electronic health records, health information technology adoption, quality of care, patient satisfaction, primary care

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