ArticleChildren (Basel, Switzerland)2022
Barriers and Opportunities for Patient-Reported Outcome Implementation: A National Pediatrician Survey in the United States.
Article in Children (Basel, Switzerland), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Implementation of child-centred outcome measures in routine paediatric healthcare practice: a systematic review.Health and quality of life outcomes · 2023Pooled it
- Patient-reported symptoms in predicting the subsequent progression of chronic health conditions among childhood cancer survivors.Communications medicine · 2026Article
- Acceptance and Utilization of Real-World Evidence among Cancer Care Physicians in the USA: A National Survey.Pharmaceutical medicine · 2025Article
- Leveraging the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research to Develop the American College of Rheumatology's Toolkit for Implementation of Rheumatoid Arthritis Outcome Measures in Clinical Practice: A Qualitative Study.Arthritis care & research · 2024Article
- Routine use of patient-reported experience and outcome measures for children and young people: a scoping review.Systematic reviews · 2024Article
- Facilitators and barriers to implementing patient-reported outcomes in clinical oncology practice: a systematic review based on the consolidated framework for implementation research.Implementation science communications · 2024Review
- Article
- Article
- Defining and Promoting Pediatric Pulmonary Health: Leveraging Patient Reported Outcomes.Pediatrics · 2023Article
- Ten Considerations for Integrating Patient-Reported Outcomes into Clinical Care for Childhood Cancer Survivors.Cancers · 2023Review
- A Review of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in Childhood Cancer.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeTo characterize pediatricians' perceived barriers and areas of confidence in assessing patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in the U.S., and to test associations of these factors with implementing PRO assessment.
methodsUsing a random sample from the members of American Medical Association, we recruited general pediatricians and pediatric subspecialists to complete a survey (July 2011 to December 2013). Perceived barriers and confidence in PRO assessment were compared by age, pediatric specialty (general pediatrics, seven subspecialties), practice settings (academic, private), and region of practice. Multivariable logistic regressions tested associations of demographic factors, barriers, and confidence factors with the implementation of PRO assessment.
findingsThe survey was completed by 458 participants (response rate 48.5%); of these, 40.4%, 15.9%, 15.5%, and 8.1% were general pediatricians, cardiology, hematology/oncology, and pulmonary specialists, respectively. PRO assessment was implemented by 29.0% of the pediatricians. The top five barriers for PRO assessment included limited time/manpower (79.0%), limited training (77.4%), lengthy PRO instruments (76%), lack of meaningful cut-offs on PRO scores (75.5%), and unavailable PRO instruments (75.0%). Limited knowledge of PROs (OR 4.10; 95% CI 2.21, 7.60) and unavailability of PRO instruments (OR 1.87; 95% CI 1.01, 3.49) increased the odds of not implementing the assessment, whereas confidence in PRO assessments compatible with norms (OR 0.41; 95% CI 0.23, 0.72) and perceived benefit over clinical judgment alone (OR 0.53; 95% CI 0.31, 0.93) decreased the odds of not implementing the assessment.
interpretationsignificant barriers to PRO assessment in pediatric settings suggest the need for providing training, resources, and practical guidance toward implementation. Patient or Public Contribution: healthcare service users contributed to this study by completing a survey and providing feedback about the barriers and areas of confidence in assessing PROs for pediatric populations.
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.