ReviewPatient related outcome measures2019
Truthfulness in patient-reported outcomes: factors affecting patients' responses and impact on data quality.
Review in Patient related outcome measures, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 75 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
75 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Pooled it
- Symptom-guided reduction of BCG dwell time: findings from the north-REG randomized trial.BJU international · 2026Trial
- Trial
- Quality of life during usual epilepsy care for anxiety or depression symptoms: Secondary patient-reported outcomes in a randomized trial of remote assessment methods.Epilepsy research · 2024Trial
- App-Based Mental Training to Reduce Atrial Fibrillation-Related Symptoms After Pulmonary Vein Isolation:Journal of the American Heart Association · 2024Trial
- Trial
- Routine collection of patient-reported outcomes in HIV clinics: lessons learned after more than 130 000 assessments have been completed.AIDS (London, England) · 2026Article
- Phenotyping treatment-naive uncontrolled asthma in adults: A primary care framework.The journal of allergy and clinical immunology. Global · 2026Article
- Review
- Multinational stakeholder engagement to inform future development and refinement of the EuroQol toddler and infant populations (EQ-TIPS).The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2026Article
- Exploring Acceptance of a Clinical Workflow Tool in the Swedish Prosthetics and Orthotics Sector: Qualitative Study.JMIR formative research · 2026Article
- Beyond symptoms: uncovering type 2 inflammation and small airway dysfunction in Treatment-Naïve asthma.BMC pulmonary medicine · 2026Article
- Evaluation of the Validity and Reliability of the Persian Version of IBDcQ-8 Questionnaire.Archives of Iranian medicine · 2026Article
- From reporting to relating: Reimagining ePROMs in cancer symptom management.Social science & medicine (1982) · 2026Article
- Article
- Multimorbidity research in dementia: it's time to shift to a person-centred approach.Frontiers in dementia · 2026Article
- Psychometric Validation of the Arabic Version of the WPAI:Migraine Questionnaire in Patients with Migraine.Neurology international · 2025Article
- Comparison of the Quantitative Myasthenia Gravis and Myasthenia Gravis Activity of Daily Living Scores From a Clinical Practice Perspective.Muscle & nerve · 2025Article
- Quality of patient-centred recovery trajectories after different types of surgery. Comment on Br J Anaesth 2025; 135: 755-63.British journal of anaesthesia · 2025Article
- Article
15 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The use of patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures in research and clinical care has expanded dramatically, reflective of an increasing recognition of patient-centeredness as an important aspect of high-quality health care. Given this rapid expansion, ensuring that data collected using PRO measures is of high quality is crucial for their continued successful application. Because of the subjective nature of the outcomes assessed, there are many factors that may influence patients' responses and thus challenge the overall quality of the data. In this review, we discuss the multiple factors that may affect patients' responses on PRO measures. These factors may arise during instrument development and administration or secondary to patient-level response behaviors. We further examine the relevant literature to delineate how these factors may impact data quality and review methods for accounting for these factors. Consideration of such factors is critical to ensuring data collected truthfully reflects patients' evaluations and provides accurate conclusions.
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.