ArticleThe Permanente journal2014
Comparison of paper and electronic surveys for measuring patient-reported outcomes after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction.
Article in The Permanente journal, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Investigating the Bias in Orthopaedic Patient-reported Outcome Measures by Mode of Administration: A Meta-analysis.Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons. Global research & reviews · 2020Pooled it
- A randomised controlled trial comparing completeness of responses of three methods of collecting patient-reported outcome measures in men diagnosed with prostate cancer.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2019Trial
- Young or Old Age and Non-White Race Are Associated With Poor Patient-Reported Outcome Measure Response Compliance After Orthopaedic Surgery.Arthroscopy, sports medicine, and rehabilitation · 2023Review
- Development and usability testing of an electronic patient-reported outcome (ePRO) solution for patients with inflammatory diseases in an Advanced Therapy Medicinal Product (ATMP) basket trial.Journal of patient-reported outcomes · 2023Article
- Evaluating the Use of PROMs in Paediatric Orthopaedic Registries.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Patient-Reported Outcome, Return to Sport, and Revision Rates 7-9 Years After Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: Results From a Cohort of 2042 Patients.The American journal of sports medicine · 2022Article
- The First Report of the International Cartilage Regeneration and Joint Preservation Society's Global Registry.Cartilage · 2021Review
- Comparing Patients' Experiences with Electronic and Traditional Consultation: Results from a Multisite Survey.Journal of general internal medicine · 2020Article
- Measurement of Health and Social Behaviors in Schoolchildren: Randomized Study Comparing Paper Versus Electronic Mode.Zdravstveno varstvo · 2019Article
- Adolescent and Young Adult Perspectives on Quality and Value in Health Care.Academic pediatricsArticle
- How short or long should be a questionnaire for any research? Researchers dilemma in deciding the appropriate questionnaire length.Saudi journal of anaesthesiaReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThis study compared response rates of paper and electronic versions of the Knee injury Osteoarthritis and Outcome Score questionnaire and examined the characteristics of patients who responded to each survey method.
methodsA total of 1486 patients registered by the Kaiser Permanente Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Registry between 2005 and 2010 were included in this study. Response rates by survey modality for the overall cohort, by the specific time periods, and by age and sex at time of anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction were compared using χ(2) tests or the Fisher exact test when appropriate. Independent Student t tests were used to compare the Knee injury Osteoarthritis and Outcome Scores of survey respondents.
resultsThe overall survey response rate was 42%. The 36% response rate in the electronic-survey group was significantly higher than the 22% response rate in the paper-survey group (p < 0.001). The electronic response rate was also significantly higher than the paper response rate at all follow-up times (35% vs 25% at 1 year, p = 0.004, 38% vs 20% at 2 years, p < 0.001, and 35% vs 21% at 3 years; p < 0.001) and among all age groups 19 years and older.
conclusionAlthough the electronic survey produced higher response rates, it is not sufficient alone to replace the traditional paper version among this Kaiser Permanente population.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.