Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35464815›Full record

ArticleBMJ surgery, interventions, & health technologies2022

User-centered design and agile development of a novel mobile health application and clinician dashboard to support the collection and reporting of patient-reported outcomes for breast cancer care.

Elena Tsangaris, Maria Edelen, Jessica Means, Madelijn Gregorowitsch, Joanna O'Gorman, Rakasa Pattanaik, Laura Dominici, Michael Hassett, Mary Lynch Witkowski, Kristen Schrieber and 3 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ surgery, interventions, & health technologies, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
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

13 authors.

Elena TsangarisDepartment of Surgery, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-4379-0431
Maria EdelenDepartment of Surgery, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Jessica MeansDepartment of Surgery, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Madelijn GregorowitschDepartment of Surgery, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Joanna O'GormanDepartment of Surgery, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Rakasa PattanaikDepartment of Surgery, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Laura DominiciDepartment of Surgery, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Michael HassettDepartment of Medical Oncology, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Mary Lynch WitkowskiInstitute for Strategy & Competitiveness, Harvard Business School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Kristen SchrieberDepartment of Anesthesiology, Perioperative, and Pain Medicine, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Elizabeth FrankDana Farber/Harvard Cancer Center Breast Cancer Advocates, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Martha CarnieDana Farber/Harvard Cancer Center Breast Cancer Advocates, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Andrea PusicDepartment of Surgery, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objectives: There is a need for advancements in health information technology that will transform how patient-reported outcomes (PRO) data are collected, reported, and used in breast cancer care. The objective of this study was to develop an innovative and customizable platform, called imPROVE to support PRO uptake in breast cancer care. Design: User-centered design and agile development were employed. Recurrent stakeholder meetings with experts in the field of breast cancer care, in-depth one-on-one qualitative interviews with a clinical sample of patients with breast cancer, and focus groups with Dana-Farber/Harvard Cancer Center (DF/HCC) Breast Cancer Advisory Group members, were used to elicit feedback for the design features and functions of a patient mobile application and clinician dashboard. Setting: This study was conducted at two academic hospitals in the USA. Participants: Participants included experts in the field of breast cancer care, value-based healthcare, and health information technology, a clinical sample of patients with breast cancer, and members of the DF/HCC Breast Cancer Advisory Group. Main outcome measures: imPROVE incorporates the International Consortium for Health Outcomes Measurement (ICHOM) breast cancer standard outcome set as well as the complete BREAST-Q Breast Cancer Module. Results: Feedback was elicited from eight stakeholder meetings (n=28 members), interviews with a clinical sample of patients (n=28), and two focus groups with members of the DF/HCC Breast Cancer Advisory Group (n=17 members in each focus group). Participant feedback led to the development of a patient mobile application consisting of five components (myCare, myStory, myResources, myCommunity, and myNotes) and a clinician dashboard that includes an overview table and individual patient profiles with data displays. Conclusions: imPROVE has the potential to transform the way we deliver care to patients. Developed from best practices in user-centered design, agile development, and qualitative methods; imPROVE addresses the needs of multiple stakeholders, including patients, clinicians, healthcare administrators, and researchers.

Indexed as

outcome assessment (health care)outcomes researchpatient outcome assessmentwomen's Health

Identifiers

PMID35464815
PMCPMC8987795

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.