ArticleJAMA network open2020
Factors Associated With Increased Collection of Patient-Reported Outcomes Within a Large Health Care System.
Article in JAMA network open, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 51 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
51 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Patient-Reported Outcomes in Venous Thromboembolism: A Systematic Review of the Literature, Current Challenges, and Ways Forward.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2023Pooled it
- Patient Portal Engagement in Oncology: Results From the NU IMPACT Study in a Large Health Care System.JCO clinical cancer informatics · 2025Trial
- Clinical Impact of Routine Assessment of Patient-Reported Health Status in Heart Failure Clinic: The PRO-HF Trial.Circulation · 2024Trial
- Multilevel factors associated with nonresponse to patient-reported outcome measures in routine radiation oncology care.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2026Article
- Assessing the properties of an encounter-based "process of recovery" measure of patient benefit following rotator cuff repair.JSES international · 2026Article
- A successful model for KSA-based payor-provider collaborative in maternity care.Journal of patient-reported outcomes · 2026Article
- Privacy preserving digital platform for patient reported outcomes in inflammatory bowel disease.NPJ digital medicine · 2026Article
- Integrating real-time patient-reported outcomes in colorectal cancer care: development and evaluation of a concise clinical scorecard.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2026Article
- Anticipating incomplete patient-reported outcomes in schizophrenia: a machine learning approach to predict the occurrence of missing data.Health and quality of life outcomes · 2026Article
- Self-completed patient-reported outcome measures in adults with epilepsy: A review.Epilepsia open · 2026Review
- Language concordance in the digital collection of patient-reported outcome measures.JAMIA open · 2026Article
- Using transfer learning to improve prediction of suicide risk in acute care hospitals.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2026Article
- Influence of Sociodemographic Factors on Patient Completion of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in Hand Surgery Patients.Journal of hand surgery global online · 2026Article
- Towards enhancing the representativeness of patient-reported outcomes collection at community cancer centers.Advances in patient-reported outcomes · 2025Article
- Comparing patient-reported symptoms and structured clinician documentation in electronic health records.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2025Article
- Adherence to daily electronic symptom screening in pediatric cancer: associations with time, location and pain.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2025Article
- Cognitive deficit identified via pre-operative patient reported outcome measures is a predictor for post-operative health care utilization in gynecologic oncology patients.Journal of gynecologic oncology · 2025Article
- Study protocol: type II hybrid effectiveness-implementation study of routine functional status screening in VA primary care.Implementation science communications · 2025Article
- Using artificial intelligence to develop a measure of orthopaedic treatment success from clinical notes.Frontiers in digital health · 2025Article
- The Use of Patient-Reported Outcomes in Clinical Practice: A National Survey of Hand Surgeons.Journal of hand surgery global online · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Importance: The collection of patient-reported outcomes (PROs) has garnered intense interest, but dissemination of PRO programs has been limited, as have analyses of the factors associated with successful programs. Objective: To identify factors associated with improving PRO collection rates within a large health care system using a centralized PRO infrastructure. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study included 205 medical and surgical clinics in the Partners Healthcare system in Massachusetts that implemented a PRO program between March 15, 2014, and December 31, 2018, using a standardized centralized infrastructure. Data were analyzed from March to April 2019. Exposures: Relevant clinical characteristics were recorded for each clinic launching a PRO program. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the mean PRO collection rate during each clinic's most recent 6 months of collection prior to January 2019. Data were analyzed using a linear regression model with the 6-month PRO collection rate as the dependent variable and clinic characteristics as independent variables. Secondary analysis used a logistic regression model to assess clinical factors associated with successful clinics, defined as those that collected PROs at a rate greater than 50%. Results: Between March 2014 and December 2018, 205 Partners Healthcare clinics were available for analysis, and 4 061 205 PRO measures from 745 028 encounters were collected. Among these, 103 clinics (50.2%) collected at a rate greater than 50%. Increased collection rates were associated with more than 50% of physicians in a clinic trained on PROs (change, 19.6% [95% CI, 9.9%-29.4%]; P < .001), routine administrative oversight of collection rates (change, 16.0% [95% CI, 6.6%-25.5%]; P = .001), previous collection of PROs on paper (change, 12.5% [95% CI, 4.7%-20.3%]; P = .002), presence of a clinical champion (change, 11.2% [95% CI, 2.5%-20.0%]; P = .01) and payer incentive (change, 10.5% [95% CI, 2.0%-18.9%]; P = .02). Conclusions and Relevance: These findings suggest that training physicians on the use of PROs, administrative surveillance of collection rates, and the presence of a local clinical champion may be promising interventions for increasing PRO collection. Clinics that have previously collected PROs may have greater success in increasing collections. Payer incentive for collection was associated with improved collections, but not associated with successful programs.
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.