ArticleArchives of physical medicine and rehabilitation2022
A View of the Development of Patient-Reported Outcomes Measures, Their Clinical Integration, Electronification, and Potential Impact on Rehabilitation Service Delivery.
Article in Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Building meaningful partnerships: engaging and co-developing a patient advisory council to inform the implementation of person-centred quality indicators in Alberta primary care.Research involvement and engagement · 2026Article
- Article
- Patient-Reported Outcome Measures: An Exploration of Their Utility in Functional Assessment and Rehabilitation.Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation · 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
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Recognition of the importance of a patient's perception of their status and experience has become central to medical care and its evaluation. This recognition has led to a growing reliance on the use of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). Nevertheless, although awareness of PROMs and acceptance of their utility has increased markedly, few of us have a good insight into their development; their utility relative to clinician-rated and performance measures such as the FIM and 6-minute walk test or how their "electronification" and incorporation into electronic health records (EHRs) may improve the individualization, value, and quality of medical care. In all, the goal of this commentary is to provide some insight into historical factors and technology developments that we believe have shaped modern clinical PROMs as they relate to medicine in general and to rehabilitation in particular. In addition, we speculate that while the growth of PROM use may have been triggered by an increased emphasis on the centrality of the patient in their care, future uptake will be shaped by their embedding in EHRs and used to improve clinical decision support though their integration with other sources of clinical and sociodemographic data.
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.