Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34667879›Full record

ArticleLearning health systems2021

A learning health systems approach to integrating electronic patient-reported outcomes across the health care organization.

Elizabeth J Austin, Cynthia LeRouge, Jenney R Lee, Courtney Segal, Savitha Sangameswaran, Joseph Heim, William B Lober, Andrea L Hartzler, Danielle C Lavallee

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Learning health systems, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Can prediction models for hospital readmission be improved by incorporating patient-reported outcome measures? A systematic review and narrative synthesis.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2024
    Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Observational
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. 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

9 authors.

Elizabeth J AustinSurgical Outcomes Research Center, Department of Surgery University of Washington Seattle Washington USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4221-1362
Cynthia LeRougeDepartment of Health Services University of Washington Seattle Washington USA.
Jenney R LeeSurgical Outcomes Research Center, Department of Surgery University of Washington Seattle Washington USA.
Courtney SegalSurgical Outcomes Research Center, Department of Surgery University of Washington Seattle Washington USA.
Savitha SangameswaranSurgical Outcomes Research Center, Department of Surgery University of Washington Seattle Washington USA.
Joseph HeimDepartment of Health Services University of Washington Seattle Washington USA.
William B LoberDepartment of Health Services University of Washington Seattle Washington USA.
Andrea L HartzlerDepartment of Biomedical Informatics and Medical Education University of Washington Seattle Washington USA.
Danielle C LavalleeSurgical Outcomes Research Center, Department of Surgery University of Washington Seattle Washington USA.

Funding

AHRQ HHS R01 HS023785
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionFoundational to a learning health system (LHS) is the presence of a data infrastructure that can support continuous learning and improve patient outcomes. To advance their capacity to drive patient-centered care, health systems are increasingly looking to expand the electronic capture of patient data, such as electronic patient-reported outcome (ePRO) measures. Yet ePROs bring unique considerations around workflow, measurement, and technology that health systems may not be poised to navigate. We report on our effort to develop generalizable learnings that can support the integration of ePROs into clinical practice within an LHS framework.

methodsGuided by action research methodology, we engaged in iterative cycles of planning, acting, observing, and reflecting around ePRO use with two primary goals: (1) mobilize an ePRO community of practice to facilitate knowledge sharing, and (2) establish guidelines for ePRO use in the context of LHS practice. Multiple, emergent data collection activities generated generalizable

resultsThree core thematic areas (and 24 guidelines) emerged. The theme of

conclusionsThe guidelines produced from this work highlight the complex, multidisciplinary nature of implementing change within LHS contexts, and the value of action research approaches to enable rapid, iterative learning that leverages the knowledge and experience of communities of practice.

Indexed as

learning health systempatient‐facing technologiespatient‐reported outcomesstakeholder engagement

Identifiers

PMID34667879
PMCPMC8512814

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.