site:chartmakerpatientportal.com chartmaker patient portal

How does a patient portal improve patient engagement?from ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Patient portals may enhance patient engagement by enabling patients to access their electronic medical records (EMRs) and facilitating secure patient-provider communication.

What are the inputs and outputs of a patient portal?from ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

The inputs are the material (eg, hardware and software) and nonmaterial (eg, leadership) components that facilitate or impair the establishment or use of the portal. Processes include the interactions of the users with the portal. Outputs comprise the results of the implementation or the use of the portal. Through the analysis, we identified 14 themes within these three categories, shown in Textbox 1.

Why are registries important?from ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Similar to their function in CER, registries are expected play an important role in this new area of research in part because of their ability to provide information on ‘real-world’ settings and broad patient populations. PCORI included minimum standards for the use of registries for PCOR in the Methodology Report.46While some registries are designed explicitly to examine questions of comparative effectiveness or patient-centered outcomes research, many others are designed for different objectives yet still collect data that are useful for these analyses. Registries that were not explicitly designed for CER or PCOR may need to be augmented or linked to other data sources—for example, to obtain long-term outcomes data in the case of an in-hospital registry using linkage to claims data to evaluate blood pressure medications.47

Why are patient registry studies important?from ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Studies from patient registries and randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have important and complementary roles in evaluating patient outcomes.15Ideally, patient registries collect data in a comprehensive manner (with few excluded patients) and therefore produce outcome results that may be generalizable to a wide range of patients. They also evaluate care as it is actually provided, because care is not assigned, determined, or even recommended by a protocol. As a result, the outcomes reported may be more representative of what is achieved in real-world practice. Patient registries also offer the ability to evaluate patient outcomes when clinical trials are not practical (e.g., very rare diseases), and they may be the only option when clinical trials are not ethically acceptable. They are a powerful tool when RCTs are difficult to conduct, such as in surgery or when very long-term outcomes are desired.

What is patient registry data?from ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Data from patient registries are generally used for studies that address the purpose for which the registry was created. In some respects, such as the collection of detailed clinical and longitudinal followup data, studies derived from the patient registries described in this user's guide resemble traditional observational cohort studies. Beyond traditional cohort studies, however, some registry-based studies may be more flexible in that the scope and focus of the data collection activity of the registry may be adapted over time to address additional needs. For example, new studies, such as cluster-randomized studies or case-control studies, may be nested within an ongoing registry, and the database derived from the registry may be used to support secondary studies, such as studies that link the registry database with other data sources to explore new questions.

What is PCOR in healthcare?from ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

More recently, the newly formed Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI) has identified registries as an important potential source of data to support patient-centered outcomes research (PCOR). PCOR “assesses the benefits and harms of preventive, diagnostic, therapeutic, palliative, or health delivery system interventions to inform decisionmaking, highlighting comparisons and outcomes that matter to people; is inclusive of an individual's preferences, autonomy and needs, focusing on outcomes that people notice and care about such as survival, function, symptoms, and health related quality of life; incorporates a wide variety of settings and diversity of participants to address individual differences and barriers to implementation and dissemination; and investigates (or may investigate) optimizing outcomes while addressing burden to individuals, availability of services, technology, and personnel, and other stakeholder perspectives.”45

What is AHRQ guidance?from ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

AHRQ has also developed a guidance system for grading the strength of evidence that recommends a careful assessment of the potential value of observational studies. The guidance, which is designed to support the systematic reviews conducted by the Evidence-based Practice Center (EPC) program, is conceptually similar to the GRADE system.23When using the AHRQ approach, reviewers typically give evidence from observational studies a low starting grade and evidence from RCTs a high starting grade. These initial grades can then be raised or lowered depending on the strength of the five required evidence domains (study limitations, directness, consistency, precision, and reporting bias).24For example, the reviewers may find that observational studies are particularly relevant for some systematic review questions. The report notes: