OBJECTIVES: The Medical Library Association (MLA)/National Library of Medicine (NLM) Joint Electronic Personal Health Record Task Force examined the current state of personal health records (PHRs). METHODS: A working definition of PHRs was formulated, and a database was built with fields for specified PHR characteristics. PHRs were identified and listed. Each task force member was assigned a portion of the list for data gathering. Findings were recorded in the database. RESULTS: Of the 117 PHRs identified, 91 were viable. Almost half were standalone products. A number used national standards for nomenclature and/or record structure. Less than half were mobile device enabled. Some were publicly available, and others were offered only to enrollees of particular health plans or employees at particular institutions. A few were targeted to special health conditions. CONCLUSIONS: The PHR field is very dynamic. While most PHR products have some common elements, their features can vary. PHRs can link their users with librarians and information resources. MLA and NLM have taken an active role in making this connection and in encouraging librarians to assume this assistance role with PHRs.
OBJECTIVES: The Medical Library Association (MLA)/National Library of Medicine (NLM) Joint Electronic Personal Health Record Task Force examined the current state of personal health records (PHRs). METHODS: A working definition of PHRs was formulated, and a database was built with fields for specified PHR characteristics. PHRs were identified and listed. Each task force member was assigned a portion of the list for data gathering. Findings were recorded in the database. RESULTS: Of the 117 PHRs identified, 91 were viable. Almost half were standalone products. A number used national standards for nomenclature and/or record structure. Less than half were mobile device enabled. Some were publicly available, and others were offered only to enrollees of particular health plans or employees at particular institutions. A few were targeted to special health conditions. CONCLUSIONS: The PHR field is very dynamic. While most PHR products have some common elements, their features can vary. PHRs can link their users with librarians and information resources. MLA and NLM have taken an active role in making this connection and in encouraging librarians to assume this assistance role with PHRs.
Authors: David C Kaelber; Ashish K Jha; Douglas Johnston; Blackford Middleton; David W Bates Journal: J Am Med Inform Assoc Date: 2008-08-28 Impact factor: 4.497
Authors: José Luis Fernández-Alemán; Carlos Luis Seva-Llor; Ambrosio Toval; Sofia Ouhbi; Luis Fernández-Luque Journal: J Med Syst Date: 2013-11-13 Impact factor: 4.460
Authors: Belén Cruz Zapata; Antonio Hernández Niñirola; Ali Idri; José Luis Fernández-Alemán; Ambrosio Toval Journal: J Med Syst Date: 2014-06-24 Impact factor: 4.460
Authors: Gary L Cochran; Lina Lander; Marsha Morien; Daniel E Lomelin; Jeri Brittin; Celeste Reker; Donald G Klepser Journal: Perspect Health Inf Manag Date: 2015-11-01