Mixed-methods survey reveals substantial support for open electronic health records among retired doctors, indicating personal patient experience drives positive clinician attitudes.
Abstract Background Online patient access to electronic records is expanding internationally but remains contested. Although clinicians’ concerns are well documented, less is known about how doctors’ views change when they themselves become patients. Retired doctors, who are no longer exposed to the pressures of practice, offer a distinctive perspective. Methods We conducted an anonymous mixed-methods online survey of retired doctors aged 60 years and over in the UK and Spain. Participants reported their experiences of accessing their own medical records and their views on whether online access should be available to all patients. Quantitative analyses examined predictors of support; free-text responses were analysed thematically. Results Two hundred retired doctors participated (UK n=92; Spain n=108). Overall, 64% supported online access to health records for all patients, with no significant difference between countries. Having previously accessed one’s own medical record was the strongest predictor of support (OR 4.74, 95% CI 1.80–12.53). In contrast, age, gender, level of care (primary or secondary), and country were not associated with support. Participants described benefits including patient empowerment, transparency, error correction, and greater efficiency, alongside concerns about misinterpretation, anxiety, and the handling of sensitive information. Conclusions Doctors’ support for patient facing electronic health records appears to be driven more by experience as a patient than by professional background or national context. Future work should focus on how records can be presented and explained to minimise misunderstanding while retaining their benefits. Health systems should draw on clinicians’ own experiences as patients when implementing open records.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Jones et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: