Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27338811›Full record

ArticleQuality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation2016

The development and acceptability of symptom management quality improvement reports based on patient-reported data: an overview of methods used in PROSSES.

Alyssa Troeschel, Tenbroeck Smith, Kathleen Castro, Katherine Treiman, Joseph Lipscomb, Ryan M McCabe, Steven Clauser, Eliot L Friedman, Patricia D Hegedus, Kenneth Portier

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–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.

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

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Perceptions of Patients With Breast and Colon Cancer of the Management of Cancer-Related Pain, Fatigue, and Emotional Distress in Community Oncology.Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology · 2019
    Article
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

10 authors.

Alyssa TroeschelIntramural Research Department, American Cancer Society, 250 Williams Street, Atlanta, GA, 30301, USA.
Tenbroeck SmithIntramural Research Department, American Cancer Society, 250 Williams Street, Atlanta, GA, 30301, USA. Tenbroeck.Smith@cancer.org.
Kathleen CastroDivision of Cancer Control and Population Sciences, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD, USA.
Katherine TreimanResearch Triangle Institute, Research Triangle Park, Durham, NC, USA.
Joseph LipscombRollins School of Public Health and Winship Cancer Institute, Emory University, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Ryan M McCabeAmerican College of Surgeons, Chicago, IL, USA.
Steven ClauserPatient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute, Washington, DC, USA.
Eliot L FriedmanLehigh Valley Health Network, Allentown, PA, USA.
Patricia D HegedusGibbs Cancer Center and Research Institute, Spartanburg, SC, USA.
Kenneth PortierIntramural Research Department, American Cancer Society, 250 Williams Street, Atlanta, GA, 30301, USA.

Funding

NCI NIH HHS HHSN261200800001E
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposePatient experiences with symptom care need to be assessed and documented to ensure successful management of cancer-related symptoms. This paper details one method for creating symptom management quality improvement (SMQI) reports, including case-mix adjustment of patient-reported measures. Qualitative data regarding the acceptability of these reports at participating cancer centers (CCs) are also provided.

methodsData were collected from 2226 patients treated at 16 CCs via mailed/Web questionnaires. Twelve items assessing patient perceptions of symptom management-pain, fatigue, emotional distress-served as key quality indicators. Medico-demographic variables suitable for case-mix adjustment were selected using an index score combining predictive power and heterogeneity across CCs. SMQI reports were designed with staff feedback and produced for each CC, providing crude and adjusted CC-specific rates, along with study-wide rates for comparison purposes.

resultsCancer type and participant educational level were selected for case-mix adjustment based upon high index scores. The Kendall rank correlation coefficient showed that case-mix adjustments changed the ranking of CCs on the key quality indicators (% Δ rank range: 5-22 %). The key quality indicators varied across CCs (all p < 0.02). SMQI reports were well received by CC staff, who described plans to share them with key personnel (e.g., cancer committee, navigator).

conclusionsThis paper provides one method for creating hospital-level SMQI reports, including case-mix adjustment. Variation between CCs on key quality indicators, even after adjustment, suggested room for improvement. SMQI reports based on patient-reported data can inform and motivate efforts to improve care through professional/patient education and applying standards of care.

Indexed as

Patient Reported Outcome MeasuresQuality ImprovementSickness Impact ProfileAgedHumansMiddle AgedQuality Indicators, Health CareSurveys and QuestionnairesCancerCase-mix adjustmentPatient-reported outcomesQuality improvement reportsSymptom management

Identifiers

PMID27338811

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.