SynthesisBMJ open2021
Implementation of patient-reported outcome measures and patient-reported experience measures in melanoma clinical quality registries: a systematic review.
Synthesis in BMJ open, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 3 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
16 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Patient-reported experiences and patient-reported experience measures in primary care, home care, and community settings. A scoping review.Frontiers in rehabilitation sciences · 2026Pooled it
- Understanding factors impacting patient-reported outcome measures integration in routine clinical practice: an umbrella review.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2024Pooled it
- Effectiveness of registered nurses on patient outcomes in primary care: a systematic review.BMC health services research · 2022Pooled it
- Development of a patient-reported outcomes registry for patients with brain tumours (BEACON).ESMO real world data and digital oncology · 2026Article
- Development of patient-reported experience and patient-reported outcome measurement tool for abortion care in Ethiopia: a mixed-method study.Reproductive health · 2026Article
- Development of a digitalization concept for assessing patient-reported outcomes in the context of a University Cancer Center - a model for use in clinical routine.Journal of patient-reported outcomes · 2025Article
- Systematic development of a patient-reported ONCOlogical-ROUTinE-Screening (ONCO-ROUTES) procedure at the University Cancer Center Regensburg.Journal of cancer research and clinical oncology · 2024Article
- Collecting routine and timely cancer stage at diagnosis by implementing a cancer staging tiered framework: the Western Australian Cancer Registry experience.BMC health services research · 2024Article
- Learning health systems and evidence ecosystems: a perspective on the future of evidence-based medicine and evidence-based guideline development.Health research policy and systems · 2024Article
- Response rates in clinical quality registries and databases that collect patient reported outcome measures: a scoping review.Health and quality of life outcomes · 2023Article
- Measuring the quality of skin cancer management in primary care: A scoping review.The Australasian journal of dermatology · 2023Article
- Carer-reported measures for a dementia registry: A systematic scoping review and a qualitative study.Australasian journal on ageing · 2023Article
- Impact of glycaemic technologies on quality of life and related outcomes in adults with type 1 diabetes: A narrative review.Diabetic medicine : a journal of the British Diabetic Association · 2023Review
- Patient and healthcare provider perceptions on using patient-reported experience measures (PREMs) in routine clinical care: a systematic review of qualitative studies.Journal of patient-reported outcomes · 2022Review
- Surgeon Engagement with Patient-Reported Measures in Australian and Aotearoa New Zealand Bariatric Practices.Obesity surgery · 2022Article
- Developing an Australian Melanoma Clinical Outcomes Registry (MelCOR): a protocol paper.BMJ open · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo identify patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and patient-reported experience measures (PREMs) in clinical quality registries, for people with cutaneous melanoma, to inform a new Australian Melanoma Clinical Outcomes Registry; and describe opportunities and challenges of routine PROM/PREM collection, especially in primary care.
designSystematic review. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Which PROMs and PREMs are used in clinical quality registries for people with cutaneous melanoma, how they are collected, frequency of collection, participant recruitment methods and funding models for each registry.
results1134 studies were identified from MEDLINE, PreMEDLINE, Embase, PsychInfo, Cochrane Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects databases and TUFTS Cost-Effectiveness Analysis Registry, alongside grey literature, from database inception to 5th February 2020. Following screening, 14 studies were included, identifying four relevant registries: Dutch Melanoma Registry, Adelphi Real-World Disease-Specific Programme (Melanoma), Patient-Reported Outcomes Following Initial treatment and Long-term Evaluation of Survivorship Registry, and Cancer Experience Registry. These used seven PROMs: EuroQol-5 Dimensions, Functional Assessment of Cancer-General (FACT-G) and FACT-Melanoma (FACT-M), European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire-Cancer 30 (EORTC QLQ-C30), Fatigue Assessment Scale Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, Patient-Reported Outcome Measures Information System-29 and one PREM; EORTC QLQ-Information Module 26. PROMs/PREMs in registries were reported to improve transparency of care; facilitate clinical auditing for quality assessment; enable cost-effectiveness analyses and create large-scale research platforms. Challenges included resource burden for data entry and potential collection bias toward younger, more affluent respondents. Feedback from patients with melanoma highlighted the relevance of PROMs/PREMs in assessing patient outcomes and patient experiences.
conclusionsClinical registries indicate PROMs/PREMs for melanoma care can be incorporated and address important gaps, however cost and collection bias may limit generalisability. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42018086737.
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.