ArticleEGEMS (Washington, DC)2015
Integrating Patient-Reported Outcome Measures into Routine Cancer Care: Cancer Patients' and Clinicians' Perceptions of Acceptability and Value.
Article in EGEMS (Washington, DC), 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 50 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
50 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- What are the attitudes of health professionals regarding patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) in oncology practice? A mixed-method synthesis of the qualitative evidence.BMC health services research · 2020Pooled it
- Patient-Reported Physical Function Measures in Cancer Clinical Trials.Epidemiologic reviews · 2017Pooled it
- A randomized trial of medical cannabis in patients with stage IV cancers to assess feasibility, dose requirements, impact on pain and opioid use, safety, and overall patient satisfaction.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2021Trial
- Pilot randomized trial of an electronic symptom monitoring and reporting intervention for hospitalized adults undergoing hematopoietic stem cell transplantation.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2020Trial
- Zhengtian Capsule versus flunarizine in patients with migraine: a multi-center, double-blind, double-dummy, randomized controlled, non-inferior clinical trial.BMC complementary and alternative medicine · 2016Trial
- Comparison of Patient- and Practitioner-Reported Toxic Effects Associated With Chemoradiotherapy for Head and Neck Cancer.JAMA otolaryngology-- head & neck surgery · 2016Trial
- Quality of life and care experiences in a US multi-institutional neuroendocrine tumor cohort.Journal of the National Cancer Institute · 2026Article
- Healthcare professionals' experiences in using a patient-reported outcome tool (PRO-Pall) to identify symptoms and problems in palliative care: A mixed-methods study.Palliative & supportive care · 2025Observational
- How Does the Electronic Collection of Patient-Reported Outcomes Improve Patient Engagement in Pharmacy Encounters? A Multi-Method Study.Pharmacy (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Associations of social vulnerability index with patient-reported outcomes in women treated with chemotherapy for early-stage breast cancer.The oncologist · 2025Article
- Comparison of patient-reported symptoms with multi-item patient-reported outcome measures of fatigue, anxiety, and depression in the clinical care of women undergoing chemotherapy for early breast cancer.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2025Article
- Assessing Whole-Person Outcomes During Routine Clinical Care: A Rapid Scoping Review.Medical care · 2024Article
- Enhancing Clinicians' Use of Electronic Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in Outpatient Care: Mixed Methods Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2024Article
- Correlates of Intimate Partner Violence, Including Psychological Partner Violence, in a Multisite U.S. Cohort of People in HIV Care.AIDS and behavior · 2024Article
- Acceptability, Perceptions, and Experiences Regarding Electronic Patient-Reported Outcomes After Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy: Protocol for a Mixed Methods Feasibility Study.JMIR research protocols · 2024Article
- Article
- Patients' experiences of engaging with electronic Patient Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) after the completion of radiation therapy for breast cancer: a pilot service evaluation.Journal of medical radiation sciences · 2023Article
- Barriers and Facilitators to Implementing Patient-Reported Outcome Monitoring in Gastrointestinal Surgery.The Journal of surgical research · 2023Article
- Patient and clinician-reported experiences of using electronic patient reported outcome measures (ePROMs) as part of routine cancer care.Journal of patient-reported outcomes · 2023Article
- Real time patient-reported outcome measures in patients with cancer: Early experience within an integrated health system.Cancer medicine · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionDespite growing interest in integrating patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures of symptoms and functional status into routine cancer care, little attention has been paid to patients' and clinicians' perceptions of acceptability and value.
methodsA two-phase qualitative study was conducted to develop a web-based PRO screening system with 21 items assessing symptoms (e.g., nausea) and functional status. Phase 1 involved cognitive interviews with 35 cancer outpatients (n=9 breast chemotherapy, radiation for prostate (n=8) or head and neck cancer (n=10), and n=8 bone marrow transplant [BMT]). In Phase 2, we evaluated the acceptability and perceived value of reviewing a PRO measure during real-time clinical encounters with 39 additional outpatients (n=10 breast, n=9 head and neck, n=10 prostate, n=10 BMT) and 12 clinicians (n=3 breast, n=2 head and neck, n=4 prostate, n=3 BMT). At least 20% of patients were ≥60 years, African American, or ≤ high school.
resultsPatients felt that their PRO summary of symptoms and functional status was helpful in discussing health issues with clinicians (92%), wanted to review their results with clinicians during future visits (82%), and would recommend it to other patients (87%). Clinicians found the PRO summary to be easy to interpret (83%), most helpful for documenting the Review of Symptoms (92%), and would recommend it to future patients (92%). Over 90% of clinicians reported that consultation time did not increase.
conclusionBoth cancer patients and clinicians reported that discussing a PRO summary of symptoms and functional status during an outpatient visit was useful, acceptable, and feasible.
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.