ArticleJournal of general internal medicine2022
Adoption of Patient-Reported Outcomes by Health Systems and Physician Practices in the USA.
Article in Journal of general internal medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Can patient-reported outcome measures predict mortality in neurological populations? A systematic review.Frontiers in neurologyPooled it
- Innovation Culture Declines Drive Exnovation of Patient Engagement Strategies in Primary Care.Journal of general internal medicine · 2026Article
- Organizational characteristics associated with sustained participation in internal quality improvement: Findings from two waves of a national sample of physician practices in the United States.Social science & medicine (1982) · 2025Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPatient-reported outcome measures (PROs) can help clinicians adjust treatments and deliver patient-centered care, but organizational adoption of PROs remains low.
objectiveThis study examines the extent of PRO adoption among health systems and physician practices nationally and examines the organizational capabilities associated with more extensive PRO adoption.
designTwo nationally representative surveys were analyzed in parallel to assess health system and physician practice capabilities associated with adoption of PROs of disability, pain, and depression.
participantsA total of 323 US health system and 2,190 physician practice respondents
methodsMultivariable regression models separately estimated the association of health system and physician practice capabilities associated with system-level and practice-level adoption of PROs. MAIN MEASURES: Health system and physician practice adoption of PROs for depression, pain, and disability. KEY
resultsPain (50.6%) and depression (43.8%) PROs were more commonly adopted by all hospitals and medical groups within health systems compared to disability PROs (26.5%). In adjusted analyses, systems with more advanced health IT functions were more likely to use disability (p<0.05) and depression (p<0.01) PROs than systems with less advanced health IT. Practice-level advanced health IT was positively associated with use of depression PRO (p<0.05), but not disability or pain PRO use. Practices with more chronic care management processes, broader medical and social risk screening, and more processes to support patient responsiveness were more likely to adopt each of the three PROs. Compared to independent physician practices, system-owned practices and community health centers were less likely to adopt PROs.
conclusionsChronic care management programs, routine screening, and patient-centered care initiatives can enable PRO adoption at the practice level. Developing these practice-level capabilities may improve PRO adoption more than solely expanding health IT functions.
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.