Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25492603›Full record

ArticleThe Milbank quarterly2014

Integrating the use of patient-reported outcomes for both clinical practice and performance measurement: views of experts from 3 countries.

Philip J Van Der Wees, Maria W G Nijhuis-Van Der Sanden, John Z Ayanian, Nick Black, Gert P Westert, Eric C Schneider

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The Milbank quarterly, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06038045 (PROSPER- Electronic Patient Reported OutcomeS to Empower Patients rEcoveR), which is not on this map. Cited by 112 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
112citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

NCT06038045 completednot on this mapstarted 2023, after this paper: background citation

PROSPER- Electronic Patient Reported OutcomeS to Empower Patients rEcoveR

TypeobservationalSponsorQueen Mary University of LondonRan2023 to 2025Enrolled314ConditionsSurgery, Critical Illness, Trauma
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

112 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Value-Based Healthcare Initiatives in Practice: A Systematic Review.Journal of healthcare management / American College of Healthcare Executives · 2021
    Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Observational
  10. Multilevel factors associated with nonresponse to patient-reported outcome measures in routine radiation oncology care.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2026
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Assessing the real-world value of hemophilia care: how suitable are patient-centered outcomes for hospital-level comparisons?International journal for quality in health care : journal of the International Society for Quality in Health Care · 2026
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Responsiveness of the "PROM Pediatric Physical Therapy" in Dutch Pediatric Physical Therapy Practices.Pediatric physical therapy : the official publication of the Section on Pediatrics of the American Physical Therapy Association · 2026
    Article
  19. Article
  20. Review

52 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

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

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Philip J Van Der WeesRadboud University Medical Center, Scientific Institute for Quality of Healthcare; RAND Corporation; Harvard Medical School.
Maria W G Nijhuis-Van Der Sanden
John Z Ayanian
Nick Black
Gert P Westert
Eric C Schneider

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

unlabelledPolicy Points: The patient-reported outcome (PRO) is a standardized method for measuring patients' views of their health status. Our international study showed that experts in clinical practice and performance measurement supported the integrated collection of PRO data for use in both clinical care and performance measurement. The measurement of PROs to support patient-provider decisions and the use of PRO performance measures to evaluate health care providers have developed both separately and in parallel. The use of PROs would benefit from a shared vision by health care providers, purchasers of care, and patients regarding the aims and purposes of the various applications; and the establishment of trust among stakeholders concerning the prudent use of PRO performance measures. CONTEXT: Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) can play an important role in patient-centered health care by focusing on the patient's health goals guiding therapeutic decisions. When aggregated, PROs also can be used for other purposes, including comparative effectiveness research, practice improvement, assessment of the performance of clinicians and organizations, and as a metric for value-based payments. The feasibility of integrating the use of PROs for these various purposes on a wide scale has not yet been demonstrated. Our study was conducted to inform policymakers of prudent next steps for implementing PROs in clinical practice and performance measurement programs in order to maximize their impact on the quality of health care.

methodsWe conducted a qualitative study, interviewing 58 experts and leaders from 37 organizations (response rate: 88%) in the United States, England, and the Netherlands. Respondents included clinical practitioners (n = 30), measure developers (n = 11), and leaders of performance measurement programs (n = 17). We used a qualitative content analysis to assess current strategies for applying PROs in clinical practice and performance measurement and to identify barriers to and facilitators of further implementation.

findingsThe use of PROs in clinical practice and for performance measurement has developed both separately and in parallel. Experts across the stakeholder spectrum support the collection of PRO data in an integrated manner that would enable using the data for these distinct purposes. We identified 2 main concerns about the feasibility for integrated use of PRO data: the complexity of establishing routine data collection and the tension among stakeholders when using PRO data for different purposes. These contrasting stakeholder views suggested varying interests among clinicians, measure developers, and purchasers of care.

conclusionsData collection approaches that support the use of PROs in health care are underdeveloped, need better integration with clinical care, and must be tailored to the characteristics of the health care system. Enabling the sustainable use of PROs will require a shared vision of clinical professionals, purchasers, and patients, with a prudent selection of the steps in implementing PROs that will maximize their impact on the quality of health care.

Indexed as

Patient Outcome AssessmentQuality of Health CareData CollectionHumansInterviews as TopicNetherlandsPatientsUnited KingdomUnited Stateshealth care policypatient-reported outcomesperformance measurementquality of care

Identifiers

PMID25492603
PMCPMC4266175

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

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.