Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32653005›Full record

ArticleHealth and quality of life outcomes2020

Electronic reporting of patient-reported outcomes in a fragile and comorbid population during cancer therapy - a feasibility study.

Gry Assam Taarnhøj, Henriette Lindberg, Line Hammer Dohn, Lise Høj Omland, Niels Henrik Hjøllund, Christoffer Johansen, Helle Pappot

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Health and quality of life outcomes, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05710159 (The iBlad App - a National, Exploratory Study on a Multimodality Smartphone App in Bladder Cancer for Better Understanding of Symptoms, Quality of Life and Need for Supportive Care), which is not on this map. Cited by 20 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
9.5field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
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.

NCT05710159 unknown statusnot on this mapstarted 2022, after this paper: background citation

The iBlad App - a National, Exploratory Study on a Multimodality Smartphone App in Bladder Cancer for Better Understanding of Symptoms, Quality of Life and Need for Supportive Care

TypeobservationalSponsorOdense University HospitalRan2022 to 2024Enrolled100ConditionsBladder CancerArmsiBLAD Application to monitor symptoms and quality of life by the use of pateint-reported outcomes
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

20 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 40 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Implementation of an ePRO-based system supporting treatment readiness assessments in lung cancer care: a mixed-methods study.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2026
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Longitudinal assessment of real-world patient adherence: a 12-month electronic patient-reported outcomes follow-up of women with early breast cancer undergoing treatment.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2024
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Patient-reported outcome (PRO) measurements in chronic and malignant diseases: ten years' experience with PRO-algorithm-based patient-clinician interaction (telePRO) in AmbuFlex.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2023
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Gry Assam TaarnhøjDepartment of Oncology, University of Copenhagen, Rigshospitalet, Blegdamsvej 9, 2100, Copenhagen Ø, Denmark. gry.assam.taarnhoej@regionh.dk.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7312-7326
Henriette LindbergDepartment of Oncology, University of Copenhagen, Herlev Hospital, Herlev, Denmark.
Line Hammer DohnDepartment of Oncology, University of Copenhagen, Herlev Hospital, Herlev, Denmark.
Lise Høj OmlandDepartment of Oncology, University of Copenhagen, Rigshospitalet, Blegdamsvej 9, 2100, Copenhagen Ø, Denmark.
Niels Henrik HjøllundAmbuFlex/WestChronic, Occupational Medicine, University Research Clinic, Aarhus University, Herning, Denmark.
Christoffer JohansenDepartment of Oncology, University of Copenhagen, Rigshospitalet, Blegdamsvej 9, 2100, Copenhagen Ø, Denmark.
Helle PappotDepartment of Oncology, University of Copenhagen, Rigshospitalet, Blegdamsvej 9, 2100, Copenhagen Ø, Denmark.
University of Copenhagen · DKAarhus University · DK

Funding

Kræftens Bekæmpelse (DK) R150-A10114
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundElectronic collection of patient-reported outcomes (ePROs) is becoming widespread in health care, but the implementation into routine cancer care during therapy remains to be seen. Especially, little is known of the use and success of electronic reporting during active cancer treatment in fragile and comorbid patients. The aim of this study was to test the feasibility of ePRO and its incorporation into routine cancer care, measured by physician compliance, for a fragile and comorbid bladder cancer (BC) population receiving chemo- or immunotherapy.

methodsAll BC patients initiating treatment for locally advanced or metastatic bladder cancer at Rigshospitalet or Herlev Hospital, Denmark, were approached during an 8 month period. Exclusion criteria were patients not speaking Danish or not being signed up for electronic communication with health authorities. Enrolled patients were prompted to complete weekly ePROs from home. Patients completed the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer's general quality of life questionnaire, QLQ-C30, and the module for muscle-invasive bladder cancer QLQ-BLM30, the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, HADS, and selected items from the Patient Reported-Outcomes version of the Common Terminology Criteria of Adverse Events (PRO-CTCAE), in total 158 questions weekly. If failing to report when prompted, patients were sent two e-mail reminders. Patients were informed that the physician would have an overview of the reported ePROs at their following clinical visits. Physicians were at all clinical visits informed to look at the ePROs in a software solution separate from the medical records. Physicians were logged to check their compliance to the task. No continuous surveillance of ePROs was established.

resultsOf 91 patients screened for enrolment, 19 patients (21%) were not found eligible for standard treatment, eight patients (9%) were not signed up for electronic communication with the health authorities and nine patients (10%) declined participation. Another six patients did not meet other inclusion criteria. In total 49 BC patients were enrolled, 29 initiating chemotherapy and 20 initiating immunotherapy. A total of 466 electronic questionnaires were completed. The overall adherence of the patients to complete ePROs was at an expected level for an elderly cancer population (75%) and remained above 70% until the 6th cycle of treatment. The physician' compliance was in contrast low (0-52%) throughout the course of treatment.

conclusionsElectronic reporting of PROs is feasible in a fragile and comorbid population of patients during routine active cancer treatment. Despite clear implementation strategies the physician compliance remained low throughout the study proving the need for further implementation strategies.

Indexed as

Patient Reported Outcome MeasuresAdultAgedAged, 80 and overFeasibility StudiesFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPatient CompliancePractice Patterns, Physicians'Quality of LifeSoftwareUrinary Bladder NeoplasmsBladder cancerChemotherapyePROFeasibilityImmunotherapyPatient-reported outcomes

Identifiers

PMID32653005
PMCPMC7353726
OpenAlexW3041438108

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.