Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27637488›Full record

ReviewThe patient2017

A Review of HIV-Specific Patient-Reported Outcome Measures.

Kim Engler, David Lessard, Bertrand Lebouché

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in The patient, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 31 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
31citing papers in PubMed, 2 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.

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

31 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Health-related quality of life measures provide information on the contributors, components, and consequences of frailty in HIV: a systematic mapping review.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2024
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Patient Centered Outcomes Research in Medical Toxicology.Journal of medical toxicology : official journal of the American College of Medical Toxicology · 2025
    Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Healthcare outcomes in patients with HIV infection at a tertiary hospital during the COVID-19 pandemic.Enfermedades infecciosas y microbiologia clinica (English ed.) · 2023
    Observational
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Observational
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

3 authors.

Kim EnglerChronic Viral Illness Service, Montreal Chest Institute, McGill University Health Centre, Local D02.4110, Glen Site, 1001 Décarie Boulevard, Montreal, QC, H4A 3J1, Canada. kimcengler@gmail.com.
David LessardChronic Viral Illness Service, Montreal Chest Institute, McGill University Health Centre, Local D02.4110, Glen Site, 1001 Décarie Boulevard, Montreal, QC, H4A 3J1, Canada.
Bertrand LebouchéChronic Viral Illness Service, Montreal Chest Institute, McGill University Health Centre, Local D02.4110, Glen Site, 1001 Décarie Boulevard, Montreal, QC, H4A 3J1, Canada.

Funding

CIHR CTN 283
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The use of patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures to provide added feedback to health providers is receiving interest as a means of improving clinical care and patient outcomes, and contributing to more patient-centered care. In human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), while PROs are used in research, their application in clinical practice has been limited despite their potential utility. PRO selection is an important consideration when contemplating their use. As past reviews of PROs in HIV have focused on particular areas (e.g. disability, satisfaction with care), a more comprehensive review could better inform on the available instruments and their scope. This article reviews HIV-specific PROs to produce an inventory and to identify the central concepts targeted over time. Seven databases were searched (HAPI, MEDLINE, PsychINFO, PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, Google Scholar), generating 14,794 records for evaluation. From these records, 117 HIV-specific PROs were identified and categorized based on a content analysis of their targeted concept: Health-Related Quality of Life (23; 20 %), ART and Adherence-Related Views and Experiences (19; 16 %), Healthcare-Related Views and Experiences (15; 13 %), Psychological Challenges (12; 10 %), Symptoms (12; 10 %), Psychological Resources (10; 9 %), HIV Self-Management and Self-Care (8; 7 %), HIV-Related Stigma (8; 7 %), Body and Facial Appearance (4; 3 %), Social Support (3; 3 %), Sexual and Reproductive Health (2; 2 %), and Disability (1; 1 %). This review highlights the variety and evolution of HIV-specific PROs, with the arrival of seven categories of PROs only after the advent of highly-active antiretroviral therapy. Our inventory also offers a useful resource. However, the interest of further HIV-specific PRO development should be explored in sexual health, which received little independent attention.

Indexed as

Social StigmaAdultAgedAged, 80 and overAnti-Retroviral AgentsFemaleHIV InfectionsHumansMaleMiddle AgedPatient-Centered CarePatient Reported Outcome MeasuresQuality of LifeSelf CareAnti-Retroviral Agents

Identifiers

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.