Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34245390›Full record

ArticleJournal of patient-reported outcomes2021

From statistics to clinics: the visual feedback of PROMIS® CATs.

Maud M van Muilekom, Michiel A J Luijten, Hedy A van Oers, Caroline B Terwee, Raphaële R L van Litsenburg, Leo D Roorda, Martha A Grootenhuis, Lotte Haverman

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of patient-reported outcomes, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

18 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Designing oncology-specific patient-reported outcome dashboards: end-user preferences for reference curve inclusion and visualization in pediatric cancer care.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2026
    Article
  3. From framework to practice: applying the proteus-practice framework to learn lessons for integrating PROs in clinical care.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Making sense of PROM outcomes: a mixed method study to optimize graphical visualization formats for children.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2026
    Article
  6. Observational
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Observational
  14. Validity and reliability of the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS®) using computerized adaptive testing in patients with advanced chronic kidney disease.Nephrology, dialysis, transplantation : official publication of the European Dialysis and Transplant Association - European Renal Association · 2023
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Validation of the pedHALHaemophilia : the official journal of the World Federation of Hemophilia · 2022
    Article
  17. Article
  18. 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

8 authors.

Maud M van MuilekomChild and Adolescent Psychiatry & Psychosocial Care, Amsterdam Reproduction and Development, Amsterdam Public Health, Emma Children's Hospital, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Postbox 22660, 1100 DD, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9540-6254
Michiel A J LuijtenChild and Adolescent Psychiatry & Psychosocial Care, Amsterdam Reproduction and Development, Amsterdam Public Health, Emma Children's Hospital, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Postbox 22660, 1100 DD, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Hedy A van OersChild and Adolescent Psychiatry & Psychosocial Care, Amsterdam Reproduction and Development, Amsterdam Public Health, Emma Children's Hospital, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Postbox 22660, 1100 DD, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7342-4953
Caroline B TerweeEpidemiology and Data Science, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Raphaële R L van LitsenburgPrincess Máxima Center for Pediatric Oncology, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Leo D RoordaAmsterdam Rehabilitation Research Center | Reade, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Martha A GrootenhuisPrincess Máxima Center for Pediatric Oncology, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Lotte HavermanChild and Adolescent Psychiatry & Psychosocial Care, Amsterdam Reproduction and Development, Amsterdam Public Health, Emma Children's Hospital, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Postbox 22660, 1100 DD, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. l.haverman@amsterdamumc.nl.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7849-0562

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTo reduce the burden of completing Patient-Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs), PROMIS® Computerized Adaptive Tests (CATs) are being implemented in pediatric clinical practice. We aimed to develop recommendations for visual feedback options for PROMIS CATs on individual item and domain score level as an evidence-based feedback recommendation for PROMIS CATs is lacking.

methodsFocus groups were held with clinicians who use the KLIK PROM portal. Literature-based feedback options were provided to initiate group discussion. Data was analyzed using thematic coding method. Additionally, a questionnaire was sent out to assess patients' (12-18y) and parents' (child 0-18y) preference for individual item feedback. Data was analyzed using descriptive statistics.

resultsSix focus groups were held (N = 28 clinicians). Regarding individual item feedback, showing the complete item bank, with only responses to administered items in traffic light colors was preferred. For domain scores, line graphs were preferred, including numerical (T-)scores, reference and cut-off lines, and traffic light colors. Separate graphs per domain, ranked in order of importance and harmonization of directionality ('higher = better') were considered important. Questionnaire results (N = 31 patients/N = 131 parents) showed that viewing their own item responses was preferred above receiving no item feedback by 58.1% of the patients and 77.1% of the parents.

conclusionsBased on the outcomes and after discussion with the Dutch-Flemish PROMIS National Center, recommendations for PROMIS CAT feedback options were developed. PROMIS CATs can now be used in clinical practice to help clinicians monitor patient outcomes, while reducing the burden of completing PROMs for patients significantly.

Indexed as

CliniciansComputerized adaptive testing (CAT)Patient reported outcome measures (PROMs)Patient-reported outcomes measurement information system (PROMIS®)Pediatric patients and parentsVisual feedback

Identifiers

PMID34245390
PMCPMC8272760

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.