You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output.
Click here to find out more.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
| Title |
Lessons about So-Called “Difficult” Patients from the UK Controversy over Patient Access to Electronic Health Records
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
The AMA Journal of Ethic, April 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1001/journalofethics.2017.19.4.stas1-1704 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Federica Lucivero |
| Abstract |
Increasing numbers of patients have direct access to their electronic health records (EHRs). Proponents of direct access argue that it empowers patients by making them more informed and offering them more control over their health and care. According to some proponents of patients' access to EHRs, clinicians' concerns about potential negative implications are grounded in a form of paternalism that protects clinicians' authority. This paper draws upon narratives from patients in the United Kingdom (UK) who have access to their EHRs and suggests strategies for moving beyond these controversies between proponents and critics of the system. It additionally shows that the very organizational, procedural, and technological infrastructure that promises patients' increased access to records can also exacerbate some patients' "difficult" behaviors. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 14 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 5 | 36% |
| United Kingdom | 2 | 14% |
| Netherlands | 1 | 7% |
| Unknown | 6 | 43% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 9 | 64% |
| Scientists | 3 | 21% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 14% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 24 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 24 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 6 | 25% |
| Student > Master | 5 | 21% |
| Researcher | 4 | 17% |
| Other | 1 | 4% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 7 | 29% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 5 | 21% |
| Philosophy | 3 | 13% |
| Social Sciences | 3 | 13% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 1 | 4% |
| Psychology | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 3 | 13% |
| Unknown | 8 | 33% |