ArticleJournal of medical Internet research2017
eHealth System for Collecting and Utilizing Patient Reported Outcome Measures for Personalized Treatment and Care (PROMPT-Care) Among Cancer Patients: Mixed Methods Approach to Evaluate Feasibility and Acceptability.
Article in Journal of medical Internet research, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 54 papers, 6 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
54 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Implementation of precision medicine in treating non-communicable diseases: a systematic review.Journal of translational medicine · 2025Pooled it
- eHealth Solutions for Symptom Assessment and Monitoring in Adults With Chronic Kidney Disease: A Systematic Review.Journal of clinical nursing · 2025Pooled it
- Factors influencing the translation of shared cancer follow-up care into clinical practice: a systematic review.BMJ open · 2022Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Remote symptom monitoring integrated into electronic health records: A systematic review.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2020Pooled 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 Voices: Multimethod Study on the Feasibility of Implementing Electronic Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in a Comprehensive Cancer Center.JMIR cancer · 2025Trial
- Development of an eHealth-enhanced model of care for the monitoring and management of immune-related adverse events in patients treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2023Trial
- Efficiency of Electronic Health Record Assessment of Patient-Reported Outcomes After Cancer Immunotherapy: A Randomized Clinical Trial.JAMA network open · 2022Trial
- A randomised online experimental study to compare responses to brief and extended surveys of health-related quality of life and psychosocial outcomes among women with breast cancer.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2021Trial
- Article
- Qualitative study of patient-reported outcome data collection among clinicians in dermatology at a single academic center.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2026Article
- Stakeholder perspectives on the use of patient-reported outcome measures in colorectal cancer survivorship care in general practice: qualitative study using interviews.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2026Article
- Tracking Chronic Diseases via Mobile Health Applications: Which User Experience Aspects Are Key?Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Interventions influencing patient-reported outcomes (PROs) response rates in cancer: a scoping review.Journal of cancer survivorship : research and practice · 2025Review
- How do clinicians use, experience, and value applications of outcome information in daily care? A mixed-methods study.Journal of rehabilitation medicine · 2025Article
- Article
- Implementing a Clinical Pathway for Needs Assessment and Supportive Care Interventions.JCO oncology practice · 2024Article
- Cancer Patients' Perspectives and Requirements of Digital Health Technologies: A Scoping Literature Review.Cancers · 2024Article
- A pre-implementation examination of barriers and facilitators of an electronic prospective surveillance model for cancer rehabilitation: a qualitative study.BMC health services research · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDespite accumulating evidence indicating that collecting patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and transferring results to the treating health professional in real time has the potential to improve patient well-being and cancer outcomes, this practice is not widespread.
objectiveThe aim of this study was to test the feasibility and acceptability of PROMPT-Care (Patient Reported Outcome Measures for Personalized Treatment and Care), a newly developed electronic health (eHealth) system that facilitates PRO data capture from cancer patients, data linkage and retrieval to support clinical decisions and patient self-management, and data retrieval to support ongoing evaluation and innovative research.
methodsWe developed an eHealth system in consultation with content-specific expert advisory groups and tested it with patients receiving treatment or follow-up care in two hospitals in New South Wales, Australia, over a 3-month period. Participants were recruited in clinic and completed self-report Web-based assessments either just before their upcoming clinical consultation or every 4 weeks if in follow-up care. A mixed methods approach was used to evaluate feasibility and acceptability of PROMPT-Care; data collected throughout the study informed the accuracy and completeness of data transfer procedures, and extent of missing data was determined from participants' assessments. Patients participated in cognitive interviews while completing their first assessment and completed evaluation surveys and interviews at study-end to assess system acceptability and usefulness of patient self-management resources, and oncology staff were interviewed at study-end to determine the acceptability and perceived usefulness of real-time PRO reporting.
resultsA total of 42 patients consented to the study; 7 patients were withdrawn before starting the intervention primarily because of changes in eligibility. Overall, 35 patients (13 on treatment and 22 in follow-up) completed 67 assessments during the study period. Mean completeness of patient-reported data was 93%, with 100% accuracy of data transfer. Ten patients completed cognitive interviews, 28 completed evaluation surveys, and 14 completed evaluation interviews at study-end. PROMPT-Care patient acceptability was high-100% (28/28) reported the time to complete the Web-based assessments (average 15 min) as about right, most willing to answer more questions (79%, 22/28 yes), 96% (27/28) found the Web-based assessment easier or same as completing a paper copy, and they valued the self-management resources . Oncology staff (n=5) also reported high acceptability and potential feasibility of the system.
conclusionsPatients and oncology staff found the PROMPT-Care system to be highly acceptable, and the results suggest that it would be feasible to implement it into an oncology setting. Suggested modifications to the patient assessment survey, clinician access to the reports, and system requirements will be made as part of the next stage of large-scale testing and future implementation of the system as part of routine care.
trial registrationAustralian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN1261500135294; https://www.anzctr.org.au/Trial/Registration/TrialReview.aspx?id=369299&isReview=true (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/6lzylG5A0).
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.