ArticleJCO oncology practice2020
Performance Measures Based on How Adults With Cancer Feel and Function: Stakeholder Recommendations and Feasibility Testing in Six Cancer Centers.
Article in JCO oncology practice, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 2 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pooled it
- Quality measurement for cardiovascular diseases and cancer in hospital value-based healthcare: a systematic review of the literature.BMC health services research · 2022Pooled it
- Gaps in patient-reported outcome measures integration into the management of lower urinary tract symptoms attributed to benign prostatic hyperplasia (LUTS/BPH): qualitative insights for implementation strategies.Journal of patient-reported outcomes · 2026Article
- Nurses' perspectives on the implementation of patient-reported outcomes: a descriptive qualitative study.BMC nursing · 2025Article
- Patient-reported outcome measures in cancer care: Integration with computerized adaptive testing.Asia-Pacific journal of oncology nursing · 2023Article
- Patient and public involvement in cancer research: A scoping review.Cancer medicine · 2023Article
- Using an implementation science approach to implement and evaluate patient-reported outcome measures (PROM) initiatives in routine care settings.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2021Article
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
28 authors at 16 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
purposePatient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) that assess how patients feel and function have potential for evaluating quality of care. Stakeholder recommendations for PRO-based performance measures (PMs) were elicited, and feasibility testing was conducted at six cancer centers.
methodsInterviews were conducted with 124 stakeholders to determine priority symptoms and risk adjustment variables for PRO-PMs and perceived acceptability. Stakeholders included patients and advocates, caregivers, clinicians, administrators, and thought leaders. Feasibility testing was conducted in six cancer centers. Patients completed PROMs at home 5-15 days into a chemotherapy cycle. Feasibility was operationalized as ≥ 75% completed PROMs and ≥ 75% patient acceptability.
resultsStakeholder priority PRO-PMs for systemic therapy were GI symptoms (diarrhea, constipation, nausea, vomiting), depression/anxiety, pain, insomnia, fatigue, dyspnea, physical function, and neuropathy. Recommended risk adjusters included demographics, insurance type, cancer type, comorbidities, emetic risk, and difficulty paying bills. In feasibility testing, 653 patients enrolled (approximately 110 per site), and 607 (93%) completed PROMs, which indicated high feasibility for home collection. The majority of patients (470 of 607; 77%) completed PROMs without a reminder call, and 137 (23%) of 607 completed them after a reminder call. Most patients (72%) completed PROMs through web, 17% paper, or 2% interactive voice response (automated call that verbally asked patient questions). For acceptability, > 95% of patients found PROM items to be easy to understand and complete.
conclusionClinicians, patients, and other stakeholders agree that PMs that are based on how patients feel and function would be an important addition to quality measurement. This study also shows that PRO-PMs can be feasibly captured at home during systemic therapy and are acceptable to patients. PRO-PMs may add value to the portfolio of PMs as oncology transitions from fee-for-service payment models to performance-based care that emphasizes outcome measures.
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.