Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36786931›Full record

SynthesisThe patient2023

Systematic Review of the Effect of a One-Day Versus Seven-Day Recall Duration on Patient Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs).

Tessa Peasgood, Julia M Caruana, Clara Mukuria

Open access · hybridAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The patient, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
16.6field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

26 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 38 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Can prediction models for hospital readmission be improved by incorporating patient-reported outcome measures? A systematic review and narrative synthesis.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2024
    Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Agreement between the EQ-5D-5L anxiety/depression dimension and GAD-7/PHQ-9 for psychological distress assessment in patients with hematologic malignancies.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2026
    Article
  5. Psychometric performance of the experimental EQ-HWB-9 and EQ-5D-5L in the general Chinese population.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2026
    Article
  6. Multinational stakeholder engagement to inform future development and refinement of the EuroQol toddler and infant populations (EQ-TIPS).The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2026
    Article
  7. A direct comparison of the measurement properties of the PROMIS-16 and EQ-5D-5L in the U.S. general population.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2026
    Article
  8. Psychometric validation of a cognition and social participation bolt-on for the EQ-5D-5L in SARS-CoV-2 infected German healthcare workers.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2026
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Transcultural translation and adaptation of EuroQol's EQ-5D-5L for Nepal: process description and recommendations for an interpretation guide.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2026
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

3 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Tessa PeasgoodCenter for Health Policy, Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, The University of Melbourne, Parkville, VIC, Australia. Tessa.Peasgood@unimelb.edu.au.ORCID 0000-0001-8024-7801
Julia M CaruanaCenter for Health Policy, Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, The University of Melbourne, Parkville, VIC, Australia.
Clara MukuriaSchool of Health and Related Research, The University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK.
The University of Melbourne · AUUniversity of Sheffield · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThere is ongoing uncertainty around the most suitable recall period for patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs).

methodThis systematic review integrates quantitative and qualitative literature across health, economics, and psychology to explore the effect of a one-day (or '24-h') versus seven-day (or 'one week') recall period. The following databases were searched from database inception to 30 November 2021: MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, Web of Science, EconLit, CINAHL Complete, Cochrane Library, and Sociological Abstracts. Studies were included that compared a one-day (or '24-h') versus seven-day (or weekly) recall period condition on patient-reported scores for PROM and Health-Related Quality-of-Life (HRQoL) instrument scores in adult populations (aged 18 and above) or combined paediatric and adult populations with a majority of respondents aged over 18 years. Studies were excluded if they assessed health behaviours only, used ecological momentary assessment to derive an index of daily recall, or incorporated clinician reports of patient symptoms. We extracted results relevant to six domains with generic health relevance: physical functioning, pain, cognition, psychosocial wellbeing, sleep-related symptoms and aggregated disease-specific signs and symptoms. Quantitative studies compared weekly recall scores with the mean or maximum score over the last seven days or with the same-day recall score.

resultsOverall, across the 24 quantitative studies identified, 158 unique results were identified. Symptoms tended to be reported as more severe and HRQoL lower when assessed with a weekly recall than a one-day recall. A narrative synthesis of 33 qualitative studies integrated patient perspectives on the suitability of a one-day versus seven-day recall period for assessing health state or quality of life. Participants had mixed preferences, some noted the accuracy of recall for the one-day period but others preferred the seven-day recall for conditions characterised by high symptom variability, or where PROMs concepts required integration of infrequent experiences or functioning over time.

conclusionThis review identified a clear trend toward higher symptom scores and worse quality of life being reported for a seven-day compared to a one-day recall. The review also identified anomalies in this pattern for some wellbeing items and a need for further research on positively framed items. A better understanding of the impact of using different recall periods within PROMs and HRQoL instruments will help contextualise future comparisons between instruments. Questionnaires ask patients about their health over different time periods (e.g., "what were your symptoms like over the last week?" versus "what were your symptoms like today?"). Studies find that people may report their symptoms as more severe when they are asked to think about their symptoms over the last week compared to the last day. Understanding how different time periods influence patient responses will allow researchers to compare and develop new questionnaires and may help clinicians to choose the best questionnaire to understand their patient's condition. We conducted a systematic literature review on studies which had looked at the impact of using different recall periods on patient responses. We found 24 studies that compared patient scores from questionnaires asking their health "over the last day" compared to "over the last week". Overall, symptoms tended to be reported as more severe and health as poorer when they were reported over the last week compared to the last day on average. We also found 33 studies that asked patients to describe which recall period they preferred. Patients had mixed preferences with more preferring a seven-day recall where symptoms and health impacts varied a lot.

Indexed as

PainQuality of LifeAdultChildHumansMiddle AgedPatient Reported Outcome Measures

Identifiers

PMID36786931
PMCPMC10121527
OpenAlexW4320709317

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.