ArticleJournal of patient-reported outcomes2022
An implementation study of electronic assessment of patient-reported outcomes in inpatient radiation oncology.
Article in Journal of patient-reported outcomes, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 3 of them syntheses 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
15 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Systematic review of patient-reported outcome item libraries in cancer research: an EORTC Quality of Life Group study.Journal of the National Cancer Institute · 2026Pooled it
- Electronic patient-reported outcome systems and capabilities in cancer care: a systematic review.Frontiers in digital health · 2025Pooled it
- Advancing patient-centered cancer care: a systematic review of electronic patient-reported outcome measures.Frontiers in rehabilitation sciences · 2024Pooled it
- Improving real-world evaluation of patient- and physician-reported tolerability: niraparib for recurrent ovarian cancer (NiQoLe).JNCI cancer spectrum · 2025Trial
- Evolving person-focused cancer care: the multifaceted benefits of electronic PRO integration and radiation therapist-led follow-up in radiotherapy.Technical innovations & patient support in radiation oncology · 2026Article
- Real-world implementation of electronic patient-reported outcome measures (ePROMs) in routine oncology practice: a scoping review.ESMO real world data and digital oncology · 2026Review
- Adaptation of digital integration of PROMs and PREMs in oncology during implementation: a scoping review.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2026Article
- Patient education on PROM completion in clinical care settings: a scoping review.Journal of patient-reported outcomes · 2026Article
- The Experience of Spanish Cancer Patients and Professionals With Quality of Life Assessment in Clinical Practice.Journal of patient experience · 2026Article
- Implementing digital patient-reported outcomes in routine cancer care: barriers and facilitators.ESMO real world data and digital oncology · 2024Review
- Intensive Longitudinal Methods Among Adults With Breast or Lung Cancer: Scoping Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2024Article
- Assessing Patient Readiness for an Electronic Patient-Reported Outcome-Based Symptom Management Intervention in a Multisite Study.JCO oncology practice · 2024Article
- How to make PROMs work: qualitative insights from leaders at United States hospitals with successful PROMs programs.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2023Article
- Essential barriers and considerations for the implementation of electronic patient-reported outcome (ePRO) measures in oncological practice: contextualizing the results of a feasibility study with existing literature.Zeitschrift fur Gesundheitswissenschaften = Journal of public health · 2022Article
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeDespite evidence for clinical benefits, recommendations in guidelines, and options for electronic data collection, routine assessment of patient-reported outcomes (PROs) is mostly not implemented in clinical practice. This study aimed to plan, conduct and evaluate the implementation of electronic PRO (e-PRO) assessment in the clinical routine of an inpatient radiation oncology clinic.
methodsThe guideline- and evidence-based, stepwise approach of this single-center implementation study comprised preparatory analyses of current practice, selection of assessment instruments and times, development of staff training, and evidence-based recommendations regarding the use of the e-PRO assessment, as well as on-site support of the implementation. Process evaluation focused on potential clinical benefit (number of documented symptoms and supportive measures), feasibility and acceptance (patient contacts resulting in completion/non-completion of the e-PRO assessment, reasons for non-completion, preconditions, facilitators and barriers of implementation), and required resources (duration of patient contacts to explain/support the completion).
resultsSelection of instruments and assessment times resulted in initial assessment at admission (EORTC QLQ-C30, QSR 10), daily symptom monitoring (EORTC single items), and assessment at discharge (EORTC QLQ-C30). Recommendations for PRO-based clinical action and self-management advice for patients concerning nine core symptoms were developed. Staff training comprised group and face-to-face meetings and an additional e-learning course was developed. Analyses of clinical records showed that e-PRO assessment identified more symptoms followed by a higher number of supportive measures compared to records of patients without e-PRO assessment. Analysis of n = 1597 patient contacts resulted in n = 1355 (84.9%) completed e-PROs (initial assessment: n = 355, monitoring: n = 967, final assessment: n = 44) and n = 242 (15.2%) non-completions. Instructions or support to complete e-PROs took on average 5.5 ± 5.3 min per patient contact. The most challenging issue was the integration of the results in clinical practice.
conclusionE-PRO assessment in oncologic inpatient settings is acceptable for patients and can support symptom identification and the initiation of supportive measures. The challenge of making the "data actionable" within the clinical workflow and motivating clinical staff to use the results became evident.
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.