Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28482877›Full record

Trial reportBMC cancer2017

Electronic patient self-Reporting of Adverse-events: Patient Information and aDvice (eRAPID): a randomised controlled trial in systemic cancer treatment.

Kate Absolom, Patricia Holch, Lorraine Warrington, Faye Samy, Claire Hulme, Jenny Hewison, Carolyn Morris, Leon Bamforth, Mark Conner, Julia Brown and 2 more

Open access · goldAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMC cancer, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 36 papers, 7 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
36citing papers in PubMed, 7 pooled it
3.2field-weighted citation impact, top 7% of its field
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

36 citing papers in PubMed, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 70 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Adult patient access to electronic health records.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2021
    Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Article
  12. Patient-reported symptom monitoring: using (big) data to improve supportive care at the macro-, meso-, and micro-levels.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2024
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Patient adherence to patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) completion in clinical care: current understanding and future recommendations.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2024
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  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

12 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Kate AbsolomSection of Patient Centred Outcomes Research (PCOR), Leeds Institute of Cancer and Pathology, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5477-6643
Patricia HolchSection of Patient Centred Outcomes Research (PCOR), Leeds Institute of Cancer and Pathology, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.
Lorraine WarringtonSection of Patient Centred Outcomes Research (PCOR), Leeds Institute of Cancer and Pathology, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.
Faye SamyLeeds Institute of Clinical Trials Research, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.
Claire HulmeAcademic Unit of Health Economics, Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.
Jenny HewisonCentre for Health Services Research, Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.
Carolyn MorrisPatient Representative, eRAPID systemic treatment workgroup, Leeds, UK.
Leon BamforthLeeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust, St James's Institute of Oncology, Leeds, UK.
Mark ConnerSchool of Psychology, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.
Julia BrownLeeds Institute of Clinical Trials Research, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.
Galina VelikovaSection of Patient Centred Outcomes Research (PCOR), Leeds Institute of Cancer and Pathology, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK. g.velikova@leeds.ac.uk.
eRAPID systemic treatment work group
University of Leeds · GBLeeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust · GB

Funding

Department of Health RP-DG-1209-10031Department of Health RP-PG-0611-20008
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundeRAPID (electronic patient self-Reporting of Adverse-events: Patient Information and aDvice) is an internet based system for patients to self-report symptoms and side effects (adverse events or AE) of cancer treatments. eRAPID allows AE reporting from home and patient reported data is accessible via Electronic Patient Records (EPR) for use in routine care. The system can generate alerts to clinical teams for severe AE and provides patient advice on managing mild AEs. The overall aims of eRAPID are to improve the safe delivery of cancer treatments, enhance patient care and standardise AE documentation.

methodsThe trial is a prospective randomised two-arm parallel group design study with repeated measures and mixed methods. Participants (adult patients with breast cancer on neo-adjuvant or adjuvant chemotherapy, colorectal and gynaecological cancer receiving chemotherapy) are randomised to receive the eRAPID intervention or usual care over 18 weeks of treatment. Participants in the intervention arm receive training in using the eRAPID system to provide routine weekly adverse event reports from home. Hospital staff can access eRAPID reports via the EPR and use the information during consultations or phone calls with patients. Prior to commencing the full trial an internal pilot phase was conducted (N = 87 participants) to assess recruitment procedures, consent and attrition rates, the integrity of the intervention information technology and establish procedures for collecting outcome data. The overall target sample for the trial is N = 504. The primary outcome of the trial is quality of life (FACT-G) with secondary outcomes including health economics (costs to patients and the NHS), process of care (e.g. contacts with the hospital, number of admissions, clinic appointments and changes to treatment/medications) and patient self-efficacy. Outcome data is collected at baseline, 6, 12, 18 weeks and 12 months. The intervention is also being evaluated via end of study interviews with patient participants and clinical staff. DISCUSSION: The pilot phase was completed in February 2016 and recruitment and attrition rates met criteria for continuing to the full trial. Recruitment recommenced in May 2016 and is planned to continue until December 2017. Overall findings will determine the value of the eRAPID intervention for supporting the care of patients receiving systemic cancer treatment.

trial registrationCurrent Controlled Trials ISRCTN88520246 . Registered 11 September 2014.

Indexed as

Electronics, MedicalAdverse Drug Reaction Reporting SystemsAntineoplastic AgentsFemaleHumansInternetNeoplasmsProspective StudiesQuality of LifeAntineoplastic AgentsAdverse eventsCancerChemotherapyElectronic health recordsElectronic patient recordsInternetInterventionPatient reported outcome measures (PROMs)Patient reported outcomes (PROs)Self-management

Identifiers

PMID28482877
PMCPMC5421322
OpenAlexW2612911641

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.