ArticleDigital health
Towards an effective framework for integrating patient-reported outcomes in electronic health records.
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.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- 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 · 2024Pooled it
- Nursing leadership visits for real-time patient experience enhancement: a cross-sectional study of tertiary hospital care in Brazil.BMC nursing · 2025Article
- Use of Mobile Technologies to Streamline Pretriage Patient Flow in the Emergency Department: Observational Usability Study.JMIR mHealth and uHealth · 2024Observational
- Design and development of a disease-specific clinical database system to increase the availability of hospital data in China.Health information science and systems · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
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
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.