Editorial: the challenge of electronically captured patient-reported outcomes.

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed.

1. PROs Assessment in Dual (Either Oral or Injectable) Antiretroviral Regimen in People with HIV: A Narrative Review.Viruses · 2025
   Review
2. Patient-Reported Outcomes (PROs) in HIV Infection: Points to Consider and Challenges.Infectious diseases and therapy · 2022
   Article
3. PROMs data: can it be used to make decisions for individual patients? A narrative review.Patient related outcome measures · 2019
   Article
4. The Use of Measurement Systems to Support Patient Self-Management of Long-Term Conditions: An Overview of Opportunities and Challenges.Patient related outcome measures · 2019
   Review

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

Authors and funding

1 author.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

Abstract

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.