ArticleJMIR formative research2021
Digital Patient-Reported Outcome Measures for Monitoring of Patients on Cancer Treatment: Cross-sectional Questionnaire Study.
Article in JMIR formative research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
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
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Sexual Quality of Life in Postmenopausal Women: A Comparative Randomized Controlled Trial of Intravaginal PRP Therapy Versus Local Hormonal Treatments.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2025Trial
- Evolving person-focused cancer care: the multifaceted benefits of electronic PRO integration and radiation therapist-led follow-up in radiotherapy.Technical innovations & patient support in radiation oncology · 2026Article
- Nurses' and Physicians' Experiences With Digital Remote Patient Monitoring-Transforming the Boundaries of Breast Cancer Care.Journal of clinical nursing · 2026Article
- Quality of life in oncology drug approvals: evidence from Swiss decisions in relation to global regulatory trends.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 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
- Acceptability and Feasibility of a Mobile Web Application to Help Identify Nontraumatic Abdominal Patient-Reported Symptoms in the Emergency Department: A Pilot Study.Journal of the American College of Emergency Physicians open · 2025Article
- Use of Remote Assessment Tools to Substitute Routine Outpatient Care: Scoping Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Article
- The Necessity of Interoperability to Uncover the Full Potential of Digital Health Devices.JMIR medical informatics · 2023Article
- Involving Patients and Clinicians in the Design of Wireframes for Cancer Medicines Electronic Patient Reported Outcome Measures in Clinical Care: Mixed Methods Study.JMIR formative research · 2023Article
- Digital Health Applications in Oncology: An Opportunity to Seize.Journal of the National Cancer Institute · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundOncology has been facing increasing outpatient activity associated with higher cancer incidence, better survival rates, and more treatment options. Innovative technological solutions could help deal with this increasing demand. Using digital patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) to identify patients who need a face-to-face (FTF) appointment is a potential approach.
objectiveThis study aims to assess the feasibility of digital PROM questionnaires to enable remote symptom monitoring for patients undergoing cancer treatment and their ability to highlight the requirement for an FTF appointment.
methodsThis study was performed at a tertiary oncology center between December 2018 and February 2019. The Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events were adapted into patient-friendly language to form the basis of treatment-specific digital questionnaires covering specific cancer drugs and radiotherapy treatments. These treatment-specific digital PROM questionnaires were scored by both patients and their clinicians during FTF appointments. Patients and clinicians did not see each other's scored PROMs. Agreement between patients and clinicians was assessed using descriptive statistics. Patient and staff feedback was also obtained.
resultsIn total, 90 patients participated in the study across 10 different treatment pathways. By comparing paired patient and clinician responses, the sensitivity of the patient-completed questionnaires in correctly highlighting the need for FTF review was 94% (44/47), and all patients with severe or grade 3+ symptoms were identified (6/6, 100%). Patient-completed PROMs appropriately revealed that 29% (26/90) of the participating patients did not need FTF review based on their symptoms alone. Certain oncological treatment pathways, such as immunotherapy, were found to have a larger proportion of patients with minimal symptoms than others, such as conventional chemotherapy. Patient and staff feedback showed high approval of digital PROMs and their potential for use in remote monitoring.
conclusionsDigital PROM questionnaires can feasibly highlight the need for FTF review in oncology clinics for treatment. Their use with specific treatments could safely reduce the requirement for FTF care, and future work should evaluate their application in the remote monitoring of patients.
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.