ArticleSystematic reviews2021
Healthcare provider characteristics that influence the implementation of individual-level patient-centered outcome measure (PROM) and patient-reported experience measure (PREM) data across practice settings: a protocol for a mixed methods systematic review with a narrative synthesis.
Article in Systematic reviews, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 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
27 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Implementation of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures for Gender-Affirming Care Worldwide: A Systematic Review.JAMA network open · 2023Pooled it
- Patient-Reported-Outcome-Measures (PROMs) After Gastrointestinal Endoscopic Resections.United European gastroenterology journal · 2026Trial
- Patient-reported Outcome Measure (PROM) Rand-36-item Health Survey for Gallstone Disease Patients Five Years Following Surgery: A Prospective Randomized Study.In vivo (Athens, Greece)Trial
- Treatment switching in oncology evidence synthesis: a systematic review of meta-analytical practices incorporating time-dependent confounding, censoring bias, and patient-level variability.Dialogues in health · 2026Article
- Artificial Intelligence for Identifying Patient-Reported Outcome and Experience Measures in Oncology: Retrospective Cross-Sectional Study Using ClinicalTrials.gov.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Defining success together: a collaborative approach for client and provider-engaged outcomes indicator development in Ontario.Research involvement and engagement · 2026Article
- Understanding data visualization techniques in qualitative studies used to develop and validate patient-reported outcome measures: a targeted literature review.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2025Review
- Enhancing provider adoption of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) through implementation science: insights from two international workshops.Journal of patient-reported outcomes · 2025Article
- Measuring experiences and outcomes of mental distress-related presentations to Australian emergency departments: lived experience perspectives.Health promotion international · 2025Article
- Expert consensus on implementing patient-reported outcomes in telehealth: findings from an international Delphi study.Journal of patient-reported outcomes · 2025Article
- Article
- Barriers and facilitators to using procedural pain treatments in pediatric patients (under 1 year old): protocol for a mixed studies systematic review with a narrative synthesis.Systematic reviews · 2024Article
- Enhancing Clinicians' Use of Electronic Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in Outpatient Care: Mixed Methods Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2024Article
- Patient-reported outcomes of psychiatric and/or mental health nursing in hospitals: a systematic review protocol.BMJ open · 2024Article
- Practical guide to implementing patient-reported outcome measures in gender-affirming care: evaluating acceptability, appropriateness and feasibility.BMJ open quality · 2024Article
- Navigating the Digital Landscape: Embracing Innovation, Addressing Challenges, and Prioritizing Patient-Centric Care.Cureus · 2024Review
- Barriers and enablers to the implementation of patient-reported outcome and experience measures (PROMs/PREMs): protocol for an umbrella review.Systematic reviews · 2024Article
- Approaches for enhancing patient-reported experience measurement with ethnically diverse communities: a rapid evidence synthesis.International journal for equity in health · 2024Review
- Evaluating client functioning in a harm reduction program in South Africa: insights from a tool derived from the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health.Frontiers in rehabilitation sciences · 2024Article
- Perspectives of inpatients with palliative care needs, their families, clinicians and key stakeholders on measuring quality of hospital care via patient experience measures: A qualitative study.Palliative medicine · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSubstantial literature has highlighted the importance of patient-reported outcome and experience measures (PROMs and PREMs, respectively) to collect clinically relevant information to better understand and address what matters to patients. The purpose of this systematic review is to synthesize the evidence about how healthcare providers implement individual-level PROMs and PREMs data into daily practice.
methodsThis mixed methods systematic review protocol describes the design of our synthesis of the peer-reviewed research evidence (i.e., qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods), systematic reviews, organizational implementation projects, expert opinion, and grey literature. Keyword synonyms for "PROMs," PREMs," and "implementation" will be used to search eight databases (i.e., MEDLINE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Web of Science, Embase, SPORTDiscus, Evidence-based Medicine Reviews, and ProQuest (Dissertation and Theses)) with limiters of English from 2009 onwards. Study selection criteria include implementation at the point-of-care by healthcare providers in any practice setting. Eligible studies will be critically appraised using validated tools (e.g., Joanna Briggs Institute). Guided by the review questions, data extraction and synthesis will occur simultaneously to identify biographical information and methodological characteristics as well as classify study findings related to implementation processes and strategies. As part of the narrative synthesis approach, two frameworks will be utilized: (a) Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) to identify influential factors of PROMs and PREMs implementation and (b) Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change (ERIC) to illicit strategies. Data management will be undertaken using NVivo 12 DISCUSSION: Data from PROMs and PREMs are critical to adopt a person-centered approach to healthcare. Findings from this review will guide subsequent phases of a larger project that includes interviews and a consensus-building forum with end users to create guidelines for implementing PROMs and PREMs at the point of care. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42020182904 .
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.