ArticleNursing research
Design and Evaluation of the Electronic Patient-Generated Index.
Article in Nursing research. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe patient-generated index (PGI) is an individualized measure of health-related quality of life. Previous work testing the PGI in the oncology setting identified threats to content validity due to navigational and computational completion errors using the paper format.
objectiveThe purpose of this pilot study was to refine and evaluate the usability and acceptability of an electronic PGI (ePGI) prototype in the outpatient radiation oncology setting.
methodsThis pilot study used adaptive agile web design, cognitive interview, and survey methods.
resultsThree iterations of testing and refining the ePGI were required. Fifteen patients completed the refined ePGI using touch screen tablets with little or no coaching required. Nearly all participants rated the ePGI as "easy" or "very" easy to use, understand, and navigate. Up to one half stated they did not share this type of information with their clinician but felt the information on the ePGI would be useful to discuss when making decisions about their care. Eight clinicians participated, all of whom felt the ePGI was a useful tool to initiate dialogue about quality of life issues, reveal infrequent or unusual effects of treatment, and assist with symptom management. DISCUSSION: The pilot study indicates the ePGI may be useful for use at the point of care. Larger studies are needed to explore the influence it may have in decision-making and restructuring patient/provider communication.
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.