Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32909161›Full record

ArticleQuality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation2021

Utilizing open-source platforms to build and deploy interactive patient-reported quality of life tracking tools for monitoring protocol adherence.

Michael A Golafshar, Molly Petersen, Carlos E Vargas, N Jewel Samadder, Katie L Kunze, Nicole McCormick, Shelby A Watkin, Diana Maleyeva, Tiffany W Cheng, Manuel Vargas and 1 more

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 28% 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.

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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Using feedback tools to enhance the quality and experience of care.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 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

11 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Michael A GolafsharDepartment of Health Sciences Research, Mayo Clinic, Scottsdale, AZ, USA. golafshar.michael@mayo.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7666-7782
Molly PetersenDepartment of Health Sciences Research, Mayo Clinic, Scottsdale, AZ, USA.
Carlos E VargasDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, AZ, USA.
N Jewel SamadderDepartment of Internal Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, AZ, USA.
Katie L KunzeDepartment of Health Sciences Research, Mayo Clinic, Scottsdale, AZ, USA.
Nicole McCormickDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, AZ, USA.
Shelby A WatkinDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, AZ, USA.
Diana MaleyevaDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, AZ, USA.
Tiffany W ChengDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, AZ, USA.
Manuel VargasDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, AZ, USA.
Todd A DeWeesDepartment of Health Sciences Research, Mayo Clinic, Scottsdale, AZ, USA.
WinnMed · USMayo Clinic in Arizona · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTracking patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and quality-of-life response rates is essential for clinical trials. Historically, rates are monitored through scheduled reports, which can require gathering, merging, and cleaning data from multiple databases. At the end of this process, if gaps are found, new data are entered and the cycle repeats, leaving a trail of reports that are not up-to-date or immediately accessible to the investigator. The financial and person-hour cost of utilizing clinical research staff for this purpose is impractical. Online dashboards are continuously updated to monitor data, providing on-demand access to promote successful research.

methodsDashboard implementation utilizes R, an open-source statistical programming language, RMarkdown, a markup language, Flexdashboard, which creates structural elements, and Shiny, allowing investigators the ability to interact with data within the dashboard. By leveraging these four elements, powerful, cost-effective interactive dashboards can be built.

resultsNumerous dashboards have been utilized to identify potentially missing data and increase protocol adherence. Immediate patient consultation can occur to retrieve protocol-related forms, reducing research staff and patient burden while improving trial effectiveness. Dashboards can monitor PROs, enrollment, demographics, toxicity, and biomarker data, clinical outcomes, and implemented predictive models, creating a single hub for on-demand clinical trial monitoring.

conclusionBy employing a set of freely available tools, the burden of utilizing study staff to continuously monitor trials is greatly reduced. These tools allow users to rapidly build and deploy dynamic dashboards capable of meeting the research needs of any investigator while limiting missing data through simplified monitoring of protocol adherence.

Indexed as

Patient Reported Outcome MeasuresQuality of LifeDatabases, FactualHumansAdherenceDashboardFlexdashboardQOLRRMarkdownShiny

Identifiers

PMID32909161
OpenAlexW3083961888

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.