Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2021 Jun;60(S 01):e44-e55.
doi: 10.1055/s-0041-1730284. Epub 2021 Jul 9.

Development and Validation of a Useful Taxonomy of Patient Portals Based on Characteristics of Patient Engagement

Affiliations

Development and Validation of a Useful Taxonomy of Patient Portals Based on Characteristics of Patient Engagement

Michael Glöggler et al. Methods Inf Med. 2021 Jun.

Abstract

Objective: Taxonomies are classification systems used to reduce complexity and better understand a domain. The present research aims to develop a useful taxonomy for health information managers to classify and compare patient portals based on characteristics appropriate to promote patient engagement. As a result, the taxonomy should contribute to understanding the differences and similarities of the portals. Further, the taxonomy shall support health information managers to more easily define which general type and functionalities of patient portals they need and to select the most suitable solution offered on the market.

Methods: We followed the formal taxonomy-building method proposed by Nickerson et al. Based on a literature review, we created a preliminary taxonomy following the conceptional approach of the model. We then evaluated each taxa's appropriateness by analyzing and classifying 17 patient portals offered by software vendors and 11 patient portals offered by health care providers. After each iteration, we examined the achievement of the determined objective and subjective ending conditions.

Results: After two conceptional approaches to create our taxonomy, and two empirical approaches to evaluate it, the final taxonomy consists of 20 dimensions and 49 characteristics. To make the taxonomy easy to comprehend, we assigned to the dimensions seven aspects related to patient engagement. These aspects are (1) portal design, (2) management, (3) communication, (4) instruction, (5) self-management, (6) self-determination, and (7) data management. The taxonomy is considered finished and useful after all ending conditions that defined beforehand have been fulfilled. We demonstrated that the taxonomy serves to understand the differences and similarities by comparing patient portals. We call our taxonomy "Taxonomy of Patient Portals based on Characteristics of Patient Engagement (TOPCOP)."

Conclusion: We developed the first useful taxonomy for health information managers to classify and compare patient portals. The taxonomy is based on characteristics promoting patient engagement. With 20 dimensions and 49 characteristics, our taxonomy is particularly suitable to discriminate among patient portals and can easily be applied to compare portals. The TOPCOP taxonomy enables health information managers to better understand the differences and similarities of patient portals. Further, the taxonomy may help them to define the type and general functionalities needed. But it also supports them in searching and comparing patient portals offered on the market to select the most suitable solution.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

None declared.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Progress of fulfillment of ending conditions by iteration. Reproduced with permission from Roeder et al.
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Preliminary taxonomy T 2 after the second iteration.
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Progress of the dimensions for the patient portal taxonomy.
Fig. 4
Fig. 4
Taxonomy T 4 after the fourth iteration with evaluated characteristics.
Fig. 5
Fig. 5
Using the final TOPCOP taxonomy to compare two patient portals. TOPCOP, Taxonomy of Patient Portals based on Characteristics of Patient Engagement.
Fig. 6
Fig. 6
The method by Nickerson et al of taxonomy building. Adapted with permission from Nickerson et al.

References

    1. Roehrs A, da Costa C A, Righi R D, de Oliveira K SF. Personal health records: a systematic literature review. J Med Internet Res. 2017;19(01):e13. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Otte-Trojel T. Ph.D. dissertation, Rotterdam, The Netherlands: Erasmus University Rotterdam; 2015. Patient Portals Development and Outcomes in Integrated and Fragmented Health Systems.
    1. Tang P C, Ash J S, Bates D W, Overhage J M, Sands D Z. Personal health records: definitions, benefits, and strategies for overcoming barriers to adoption. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2006;13(02):121–126. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Ammenwerth E, Hoerbst A, Lannig S, Mueller G, Siebert U, Schnell-Inderst P. Effects of adult patient portals on patient empowerment and health-related outcomes: a systematic review. Stud Health Technol Inform. 2019;264(01):1106–1110. - PubMed
    1. Rigby M, Georgiou A, Hyppönen H. Patient portals as a means of information and communication technology support to patient- centric care coordination - the missing evidence and the challenges of evaluation. a joint contribution of IMIA WG EVAL and EFMI WG EVAL. Yearb Med Inform. 2015;10(01):148–159. - PMC - PubMed