Background In the United States, attention has been focused on “open notes” and “open results” since the Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology implemented the 21st Century Cures Act Final Rule on information blocking. Open notes is an established best practice, but open results remains controversial, especially for diseases associated with stigma, morbidity, and mortality. Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is associated with all three of these effects and represents an ideal disease for the study of open results for sensitive test results. Objectives This study evaluates patient perspectives related to receiving COVID-19 test results via an online patient portal prior to discussion with a clinician. Methods We surveyed adults who underwent COVID-19 testing between March 1, 2020 and October 21, 2020 who agreed to be directly contacted about COVID-19-related research about their perspectives on receiving test results via a patient portal. We evaluated user roles (i.e., patient vs. care partner), demographic information, ease of use, impact of immediate release, notification of results, impact of viewing results on health management, and importance of sharing results with others. Results Users were mostly patients themselves. Users found the portal easy to use but expressed mixed preferences about the means of notification of result availability (e.g., email, text, or phone call). Users found immediate access to results useful for managing their health, employment, and family/childcare. Many users shared their results and encouraged others to get tested. Our cohort consisted mostly of non-Hispanic white, highly educated, English-speaking patients. Conclusion Overall, patients found open results useful for COVID-19 testing and few expressed increased worries from receiving their results via the patient portal. The demographics of our cohort highlight the need for further research in patient portal equity in the age of open results.
Background-Classification systems for glenohumeral instability (GHI) are opinion based, not validated, and poorly defined. This study is designed to methodologically develop and test a GHI classification system.
StarBRITE is a one-stop, web-based research portal designed to meet the day-to-day needs of the Vanderbilt University and Meharry Medical College research community during the planning and conduct of research studies. StarBRITE serves as the main online location for research support addressing issues such as identification and location of resources, identification of experts, guidance for regulatory applications and approvals, regulatory assistance, funding requests, research data planning and collection, and serves as a central repository for educational offerings. To date, there have been more than 590,038 StarBRITE hits by more than 6582 cumulative users. We present here StarBRITE design objectives, details about technical infrastructure and system components, status report and activity metrics for the first 2.75-years of operation, and a report of lessons learned during organizing, launching and refining the portal.
The Vanderbilt Institute for Clinical and Translational Research implemented the “Studio” Program in 2007 to bring together experts to provide free, structured, project-specific feedback for medical researchers. Studios are a series of integrated, dynamic, and interactive roundtable discussions that bring relevant research experts from diverse academic disciplines together to focus on a specific research project at a specific stage. Vanderbilt’s Clinical and Translational Science Award supports the program, which is designed to improve the quality and impact of biomedical research. In this article, the authors describe the program’s design, and they provide an evaluation of its first four years. After an investigator completes a brief online studio application, a studio “manager” reviews the request, assembles a panel of 3 to 6 experts (research faculty from multiple disciplines), and circulates the pre-review materials electronically. Investigators can request one of seven studio formats: hypothesis generation, study design, grant review, implementation, analysis and interpretation, manuscript review, or translation. A studio moderator leads each studio session, managing the time (90 minutes) and discussion to optimize the usefulness of the session for the investigator. Feedback from the 157 studio sessions in the first four years has been overwhelmingly positive. Investigators have indicated that their studios have improved the quality of their science (99%; 121/122 responses), and experts have reported that the studios have been a valuable use of their time (98%; 398/406 responses). To achieve the health goals of the 21st century, researchers from multiple disciplines must bridge their differences and together address the challenging problems that face us. -- The Institute of Medicine, 20011
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.