ReviewCurrent oncology (Toronto, Ont.)2022
Striving to Fill in Gaps between Clinical Practice and Standards: The Evolution of a Pan-Canadian Approach to Patient-Reported Outcomes Use.
Review in Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Systematic Review of Interventions to Optimize Emergency Department Care of Patients with Cancer.The western journal of emergency medicine · 2026Pooled it
- Physiological and psychological symptom management based on electronic patient-reported outcomes: the TD-WELLBEING randomized clinical trial.British journal of cancer · 2025Trial
- Customizing workflows for electronic patient-reported outcome (ePRO) symptom monitoring using the action, actor, context, target, time (AACTT) framework.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2025Article
- Systematic symptom management in the IMPACT Consortium: rationale and design for 3 effectiveness-implementation trials.JNCI cancer spectrum · 2023Article
- Validation of a Patient-Reported Outcome Measure for Moist Desquamation among Breast Radiotherapy Patients.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Despite the known importance and necessity of the standardized collection and use of patient-reported outcomes (PROs), there remain challenges to successful clinical implementation. Facilitated through a quality improvement initiative spearheaded by the Canadian Partnership for Quality Radiotherapy (CPQR), and now guided by the Canadian Association of Radiation Oncology (CARO)'s Quality and Standards Committee, patient representatives and early-adopter radiation treatment programs continue to champion the expansion of PROs initiatives across the country. The current review discusses the evolution of a pan-Canadian approach to PROs use, striving to fill in gaps between clinical practice and guideline recommendations through multi-centre and multidisciplinary collaboration.
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.