Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35780095›Full record

Trial reportBMC cancer2022

Electronic patient-reported monitoring of symptoms during follow-up of ovarian cancer patients: a feasibility study.

Fiona Kennedy, Leanne Shearsmith, Marie Holmes, Zoe Rogers, Rob Carter, Uschi Hofmann, Galina Velikova

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract readClinical Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMC cancer, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT02847715 (Electronic Patient Self-Reported Outcomes to Improve Cancer Management and Patient Experiences), which is not on this map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed
2.4field-weighted citation impact, top 9% 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.

NCT02847715 nacompletednot on this map

Electronic Patient Self-Reported Outcomes to Improve Cancer Management and Patient Experiences: Implement the System for Remote Monitoring of Cancer Patients in Remission

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity of LeedsRan2016 to 2021Enrolled143ConditionsCancerArmsePRIME
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

14 citing papers in PubMed, 25 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Systematic nurse-led consultations based on electronic patient-reported outcomes for women with endometrial or ovarian cancer during chemotherapy-a feasibility study.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2025
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Longitudinal assessment of real-world patient adherence: a 12-month electronic patient-reported outcomes follow-up of women with early breast cancer undergoing treatment.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2024
    Article
  11. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) to personalise follow-up care of ovarian cancer: what do patients think? A qualitative interview study.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2024
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. 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

7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Fiona KennedySection of Patient Centred Outcomes Research, Patient Reported Outcomes Group, Leeds Institute of Medical Research at St James's, University of Leeds, Bexley Wing, Beckett Street, Leeds, LS9 7TF, UK. f.r.kennedy@leeds.ac.uk.
Leanne ShearsmithSection of Patient Centred Outcomes Research, Patient Reported Outcomes Group, Leeds Institute of Medical Research at St James's, University of Leeds, Bexley Wing, Beckett Street, Leeds, LS9 7TF, UK.
Marie HolmesSection of Patient Centred Outcomes Research, Patient Reported Outcomes Group, Leeds Institute of Medical Research at St James's, University of Leeds, Bexley Wing, Beckett Street, Leeds, LS9 7TF, UK.
Zoe RogersSection of Patient Centred Outcomes Research, Patient Reported Outcomes Group, Leeds Institute of Medical Research at St James's, University of Leeds, Bexley Wing, Beckett Street, Leeds, LS9 7TF, UK.
Rob CarterSection of Patient Centred Outcomes Research, Patient Reported Outcomes Group, Leeds Institute of Medical Research at St James's, University of Leeds, Bexley Wing, Beckett Street, Leeds, LS9 7TF, UK.
Uschi HofmannCalderdale & Huddersfield NHS Foundation Trust, Huddersfield Royal Infirmary, Acre St, Lindley, Huddersfield, HD3 3EA, UK.
Galina VelikovaSection of Patient Centred Outcomes Research, Patient Reported Outcomes Group, Leeds Institute of Medical Research at St James's, University of Leeds, Bexley Wing, Beckett Street, Leeds, LS9 7TF, UK.
University of Leeds · GBHuddersfield Royal Infirmary · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundOvarian cancer patients require monitoring for relapse. Innovative follow-up methods are increasingly being explored. An electronic patient-reported outcome (ePRO) follow-up pathway was developed for women treated for ovarian cancer. This feasibility study explored patient acceptability and compliance.

methodsA single-arm non-blinded prospective feasibility study was undertaken at two hospitals. Participants were women who had completed treatment for ovarian cancer whose clinician was happy for them to be monitored remotely. Automated 3-monthly reminders were sent to participants to complete an ePRO questionnaire and obtain blood tests. Participants were reviewed over the phone by their clinical nurse specialist instead of attending clinic-based follow-up. The primary outcome was compliance (expected ePRO completions/blood tests) across the 12-month study period. Secondary outcomes were recruitment, attrition, resource use, symptom severity/alerts and patient acceptability.

resultsTwenty-four women consented (50% consent rate), and 13 remained on study at 12 months. Seven women relapsed, 3 chose to withdraw, and 1 withdrew for other clinical reasons. ePRO compliance was high and consistent at 75-82%, although the two hospitals differed. Adherence to the clinical protocol was evident for blood tests and contacts with staff (fewer visits, more phonecalls compared to an earlier audit). End-of-study feedback indicated high patient satisfaction.

conclusionsRemote ePRO follow-up for ovarian cancer is feasible and acceptable to patients who are able and willing to participate. However, the low recruitment rate (ineligible + declined) indicate it is not suitable/acceptable to all patients immediately post-treatment. Further large-scale research and implementation work is required, especially in a post-COVID era.

trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT02847715 (first registered 19/05/2016).

Indexed as

Ovarian NeoplasmsCarcinoma, Ovarian EpithelialElectronicsFeasibility StudiesFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansNeoplasm Recurrence, LocalPatient Reported Outcome MeasuresProspective StudiesAcceptabilityComplianceElectronic patient-reported outcomesFeasibility studyFollow-upOvarian cancer

Identifiers

PMID35780095
PMCPMC9250717
OpenAlexW4283788222

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.