This paper is in the following e-collection/theme issue:

Personal Health Records, Patient-Accessible Electronic Health Records, Patient Portals (538)

Published on in Vol 22, No 12 (2020): December

Preprints (earlier versions) of this paper are available at https://preprints.jmir.org/preprint/18725, first published .
Patient Challenges and Needs in Comprehending Laboratory Test Results: Mixed Methods Study

Patient Challenges and Needs in Comprehending Laboratory Test Results: Mixed Methods Study

Patient Challenges and Needs in Comprehending Laboratory Test Results: Mixed Methods Study

Authors of this article:

Zhan Zhang1 Author Orcid Image ;   Daniel Citardi1 Author Orcid Image ;   Aiwen Xing2 Author Orcid Image ;   Xiao Luo3 Author Orcid Image ;   Yu Lu1 Author Orcid Image ;   Zhe He4 Author Orcid Image
Article Authors Cited by (21) Tweetations (12) Metrics

Journals

  1. Zhang Z, Kmoth L, Luo X, He Z. User-Centered System Design for Communicating Clinical Laboratory Test Results: Design and Evaluation Study. JMIR Human Factors 2021;8(4):e26017 View
  2. He X, Hong Y, Zheng X, Zhang Y. What Are the Users’ Needs? Design of a User-Centered Explainable Artificial Intelligence Diagnostic System. International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction 2023;39(7):1519 View
  3. Sundell E, Wångdahl J, Grauman Å. Health literacy and digital health information-seeking behavior – a cross-sectional study among highly educated Swedes. BMC Public Health 2022;22(1) View
  4. Hahne J, Carpenter B, Epstein A, Prigerson H, Derry-Vick H. Communication Skills Training for Oncology Clinicians After the 21st Century Cures Act: The Need to Contextualize Patient Portal–Delivered Test Results. JCO Oncology Practice 2023;19(3):99 View
  5. Bohn M, Fabiano G, Adeli K. Electronic tools in clinical laboratory diagnostics: key examples, limitations, and value in laboratory medicine. Journal of Laboratory Medicine 2021;45(6):319 View
  6. Monkman H, Griffith J, MacDonald L, Lesselroth B. Consumers’ Needs for Laboratory Results Portals: Questionnaire Study. JMIR Human Factors 2023;10:e42843 View
  7. Nankervis H, Huntley A, Whiting P, Hamilton W, Singh H, Dawson S, Sprackman J, Ferguson Montague A, Watson J. Blood test result communication in primary care: mixed-methods systematic review protocol. BJGP Open 2023;7(4):BJGPO.2023.0105 View
  8. Stoffel M, Beal S, Ibrahim K, Rummel M, Greene D. Optimizing the data in direct access testing: information technology to support an emerging care model. Critical Reviews in Clinical Laboratory Sciences 2024;61(2):127 View
  9. Petrovskaya O, Karpman A, Schilling J, Singh S, Wegren L, Caine V, Kusi-Appiah E, Geen W. Patient and Health Care Provider Perspectives on Patient Access to Test Results via Web Portals: Scoping Review. Journal of Medical Internet Research 2023;25:e43765 View
  10. Morgan G, Briollais L, Clausen M, Casalino S, Mighton C, Chowdhary S, Frangione E, Fung C, Arnoldo S, Bearss E, Binnie A, Borgundvaag B, Dagher M, Devine L, Friedman S, Khan Z, McGeer A, McLeod S, Richardson D, Stern S, Taher A, Wong I, Zarei N, Bombard Y, Lerner-Ellis J, Taher J. Public knowledge of SARS-CoV-2 serological and viral lineage laboratory testing and result interpretation: A GENCOV study cross-sectional survey. Clinical Biochemistry 2023;118:110607 View
  11. Lazaro G. When Positive is Negative: Health Literacy Barriers to Patient Access to Clinical Laboratory Test Results. The Journal of Applied Laboratory Medicine 2023;8(6):1133 View
  12. Franco J, Morris N, Fung M. Defining and identifying laboratory literacy as a component of health literacy: An assessment of existing health literacy tools. Academic Pathology 2023;10(4):100096 View
  13. He Z, Bhasuran B, Jin Q, Tian S, Hanna K, Shavor C, Arguello L, Murray P, Lu Z. Quality of Answers of Generative Large Language Models Versus Peer Users for Interpreting Laboratory Test Results for Lay Patients: Evaluation Study. Journal of Medical Internet Research 2024;26:e56655 View
  14. Edwards C, Erstad B. Evaluation of a Generative Language Model Tool for Writing Examination Questions. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education 2024;88(4):100684 View
  15. Luby S. Evaluating Laboratory Communications to NKF-WG Recommended Stakeholders during Implementation of the CKD-EPI 2021 Equation. The Journal of Applied Laboratory Medicine 2024 View
  16. Steimetz E, Minkowitz J, Gabutan E, Ngichabe J, Attia H, Hershkop M, Ozay F, Hanna M, Gupta R. Use of Artificial Intelligence Chatbots in Interpretation of Pathology Reports. JAMA Network Open 2024;7(5):e2412767 View
  17. van der Mee F, Schaper F, Jansen J, Bons J, Meex S, Cals J. Enhancing patient understanding of laboratory test results: a systematic review of presentation formats and their impact on perception, decision, action, and memory (Preprint). Journal of Medical Internet Research 2023 View
  18. van Kessel R, Ranganathan S, Anderson M, McMillan B, Mossialos E. Exploring potential drivers of patient engagement with their health data through digital platforms: A scoping review. International Journal of Medical Informatics 2024;189:105513 View
  19. Schneider S, Klug A, Andrade J. Phosphorus Knowledge and Dietary Intake of Phosphorus of US Adults Undergoing Dialysis. Nutrients 2024;16(13):2034 View

Books/Policy Documents

  1. Lu Y, Zhang Z, Min K, Luo X, He Z. Diversity, Divergence, Dialogue. View