Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30127692›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of integrated care2018

Using Patient Reported Outcomes Measures to Promote Integrated Care.

Marcel G M Olde Rikkert, Philip J van der Wees, Yvonne Schoon, Gert P Westert

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of integrated care, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 39 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
39citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Observational
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  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

4 authors.

Marcel G M Olde RikkertChair Dept Geriatrics and Radboudumc Alzheimer Center, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, NL.ORCID 0000-0003-1397-1677
Philip J van der WeesIQ healthcare Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, NL.
Yvonne SchoonDepartment Geriatrics and Chair Emergency Department, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, NL.
Gert P WestertChair IQ healthcare and Theme leader Health care Improvement Science, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, NL.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionPatient reported outcome measures (PROMs) have been introduced as standardised outcomes, but have not been implemented widely for disease targeted pathways of care, nor for geriatric patients who prefer functional performance and quality of life. DISCUSSION: We describe innovative multipurpose implementation of PROMs as evidenced by two best practices of PROMs application in geriatric and physiotherapy practice. We show that PROMs can show meaningful outcomes in older subjects' patient journeys, which can at the same time serve individuals and groups of both patients and professionals. KEY LESSON: PROMs can deliver generic outcomes relevant for older patients, may improve patient-physician relationship, quality of care and prediction of future outcomes in geriatric care, if they are valid, reliable and responsive, but still short and simple. A precondition to make the hard tip from research to practice is that PROMs are carefully positioned in the clinical encounters and in electronic health records.

Indexed as

geriatricsimplementationpatient centered carepatient reported outcomePROM

Identifiers

PMID30127692
PMCPMC6095063

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.