Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31849553›Full record

ArticlePatient related outcome measures2019

Developing a Preliminary Conceptual Framework for Guidelines on Inclusion of Patient Reported-Outcome Measures (PROMs) in Clinical Quality Registries.

Rasa Ruseckaite, Ashika D Maharaj, Karolina Krysinska, Joanne Dean, Susannah Ahern

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article 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 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Development of a framework to assess the quality of data sources in healthcare settings.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2022
    Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Evaluation of the acceptability of patient-reported outcome measures in women following pelvic floor procedures.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2022
    Article
  13. Article
  14. [Sinicization, cross-cultural adjustment and reliability and validity test of the Burnt Hand Outcome Tool].Zhonghua shao shang za zhi = Zhonghua shaoshang zazhi = Chinese journal of burns · 2021
    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

5 authors.

Rasa RuseckaiteDepartment of Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Ashika D MaharajDepartment of Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-4725-613X
Karolina KrysinskaDepartment of Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Joanne DeanDepartment of Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-4164-5844
Susannah AhernDepartment of Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposePatient-centred and value-based health-care organisations are increasingly recognising the importance of the patient perspective in the measurement and evaluation of health outcomes. This has been primarily implemented using patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). Clinical quality registries (CQRs) are specifically designed to improve direct clinical care, benchmark health-care provision and inform health service planning and policy. Despite CQRs having incorporated the patient perspective to support the evaluation of health-care provision, no evidence-based guidelines for inclusion of PROMs in CQRs exist. This has led to substantial heterogeneity in capturing and reporting PROMs within this setting. This publication is the first in a series describing the development of evidence-informed guidelines for PROMs inclusion within CQRs in Australia.

methodsThis study consisted of three components: 1) a literature review of existing evidence of guidelines, enablers, barriers, and lessons learnt of PROMs use within the CQRs setting; 2) a survey of Australian CQRs to determine current practices for PROMs use and reporting; and 3) development of a preliminary conceptual framework for PROMs inclusion in CQRs.

resultsContent analysis of the literature review and survey of 66 Australian registries elicited eight categories for the conceptual framework. The framework covers eight components: rationale, setting, ethics, selection of PROMs, administration, data management, statistical methods, feedback, and reporting.

conclusionWe developed a preliminary conceptual framework, which classified findings, from both the literature and the survey, into broad categories ranging from initial development to outcome dissemination providing the structure for development of guidelines in the next phase of this project, engaging national and international leaders in health-related quality of life research, clinicians, researchers, patient advocates and consumers.

Indexed as

outcomespatient voicequality of liferegistry

Identifiers

PMID31849553
PMCPMC6911317

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.