Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35860613›Full record

ArticleDigital health

Towards an effective framework for integrating patient-reported outcomes in electronic health records.

Panzhang Wang, Tao Li, Lei Yu, Liang Zhou, Tao Yan

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Digital health. 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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 12% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Understanding factors impacting patient-reported outcome measures integration in routine clinical practice: an umbrella review.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2024
    Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Observational
  4. 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 1 institution in 1 country.

Panzhang WangShanghai Jiao Tong University Affiliated Sixth People's Hospital, Shanghai, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2743-4904
Tao LiShanghai Jiao Tong University Affiliated Sixth People's Hospital, Shanghai, China.
Lei YuShanghai Jiao Tong University Affiliated Sixth People's Hospital, Shanghai, China.
Liang ZhouShanghai Jiao Tong University Affiliated Sixth People's Hospital, Shanghai, China.
Tao YanShanghai Jiao Tong University Affiliated Sixth People's Hospital, Shanghai, China.
Shanghai Jiao Tong University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: In the past decade, electronic modalities are increasingly deployed to integrate patient-reported outcomes into electronic health records. Most popularly, patient portals are used for remote questionnaires, and tablets are provided to patients in-office in case they need help. They are both useful. But some barriers are still in the way, which place burdens on patients and clinicians in the process of routine data collection. Objective: This study aims to describe a portable and scalable framework which can simplify the patient-reported outcome integration by mitigating the related burdens. Methods: A framework was proposed to use a modular approach to replace the tethered approach. The framework was open-sourced on GitHub. After development and testing, it was evaluated on an instrument with 24 questions in a real clinical setting. Patients were randomly selected in every modality-based group. For objective analysis, completion time and response rate were collected. No-show data was collected and analyzed. For subjective analysis, the NASA Task Load Index was used to measure workload, and the Net Promoter Score was used to assess user satisfaction. Results: The model could contain 46,656 questions. A quick response code could store 1120 encoded items. For remote visits, the response rate was improved compared to the portal group (76.6% vs. 61.1%). The completion time was reduced by 37.5% when compared to the tablet group and was reduced by 43.4% when compared to the portal group. The workload for clinicians and patients was both reduced significantly ( Conclusions: Collecting patient-reported outcomes over a quick response code appears to be an alternative modality to enable a simplified integration. This study provides new insights to collect patient-reported outcomes with interoperability and substitutability in mind.

Indexed as

data collection methodElectronic health recordsintegrationinteroperabilitypatient-reported outcomeprivacyquick response codesecuritysubstitutability

Identifiers

PMID35860613
PMCPMC9290150
OpenAlexW4285413898

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.