Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35756978›Full record

ReviewArchives of rehabilitation research and clinical translation2022

Use of Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Measures in Clinical Research in Patients With Stroke: A Systematic Literature Review.

Henk J Arwert, Daniella M Oosterveer, Jan W Schoones, Caroline B Terwee, Thea P M Vliet Vlieland

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Archives of rehabilitation research and clinical translation, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 20% of its field
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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
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

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Henk J ArwertDepartment of Rehabilitation, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands.
Daniella M OosterveerBasalt Rehabilitation, Leiden, the Netherlands.
Jan W SchoonesLeiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands.
Caroline B TerweeDepartment of Epidemiology and Data Science, Amsterdam University Medical Center, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Thea P M Vliet VlielandDepartment of Orthopedics, Rehabilitation, and Physical Therapy, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands.
Leiden University Medical Center · NLAmsterdam University Medical Centers · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: To systematically describe the use and outcomes of Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) measures in clinical studies in populations with stroke. Data Sources: A systematic search on the use of PROMIS measures in clinical stroke studies in 9 electronic databases. Study Selection: Studies had to be original, reporting on outcome data using PROMIS measures in populations with stroke (ischemic and/or hemorrhagic), from January 1st, 2007. Initially, 174 unique studies met the inclusion criteria. In 2 steps, titles, abstracts and full-text articles were screened for eligibility (2 authors independently). Data Extraction: From the selected articles, study characteristics, type of PROMIS measures, and its outcomes were extracted by 2 authors independently. The authors discussed their views to achieve consensus. A third author was consulted if necessary. Data Synthesis: In total, 27 studies (24,366 patients) were included, predominantly from the United States (22); most study populations were hospital-based (20); the number of patients ranged from 30-3283. In general, patients had no or mild symptoms (median modified Rankin scale 1). Two different generic PROMIS measures were reported (PROMIS Global Health, PROMIS 29) and 9 PROMIS measures focusing on specific domains (sleep, pain, physical functioning, self-efficacy, satisfaction with social roles, depression, anxiety, cognition, fatigue). These match the International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health (ICF) domains mentioned in the Core Set for Stroke. The measures were administered 1-55 months after stroke. Outcome data are provided. Pooling of data was not achieved because of a large variety in study characteristics (inclusion criteria, follow-up moments, data processing). Conclusions: The PROMIS measures in this review could be relevant from a patient's perspective, covering ICF core set domains for patients with stroke. The large variety in study characteristics hampers comparisons across populations. Many different outcome measures are used to report results of stroke rehabilitation studies.

Indexed as

GH, Global HealthICF, International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and HealthICHOM, International Consortium for Health Outcomes MeasurementmRS, modified Rankin scalePatient reported outcome measuresPROMIS, Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information SystemRehabilitationStrokeSystematic review

Identifiers

PMID35756978
PMCPMC9214304
OpenAlexW4220862647

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.