ArticleBMJ open2023
Protocol for a realist and social return on investment evaluation of the use of patient-reported outcomes in four value-based healthcare programmes.
Article in BMJ open, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- A Realist Evaluation of the Implementation and Use of Patient-Reported Outcomes in Four Value-Based Healthcare Programmes.Journal of advanced nursing · 2026Article
- Saskatoon, Saskatchewan's safe consumption site provides a sizeable social and economic return on investment.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- A social return on investment analysis of patient-reported outcome measures in value-based healthcare.Journal of patient-reported outcomes · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThere is growing recognition that in order to remain sustainable, the UK's National Health Service must deliver the best patient outcomes within available resources. This focus on outcomes relative to cost is the basis of value-based healthcare (VBHC) and has led to interest in the recording of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) to measure patient perspectives on the impact of a health condition on their lives. Every health board in Wales is now required to collect PROMS as part of routine care. We will evaluate the VBHC programme implemented in a lead health board. The study aim is to understand what works about PROMs collection, for whom, in what contexts and why in a VBHC context. In addition, we will assess the social value of integrating PROMs collection into routine care. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A three-stage mixed-methods study comprising a realist evaluation integrated with social return on investment (SROI) analysis across four conditions; Parkinson's disease, epilepsy, heart failure and cataract surgery. Workstream 1: Development of logic models, informed by a scoping review, documentary analysis, patient and public involvement (PPI), staff and key stakeholder engagement. Workstream 2: Realist evaluation building on multiple data sources from stages 1 to 3 to test and refine the programme theories that arise from the logic model development. Workstream 3: SROI analysis using interview data with patients, staff and carers, stakeholder and PPI engagement, anonymised routinely collected data, and questionnaires to populate a model that will explore the social value generated by the implementation of PROMs. Findings across stages will be validated with key stakeholders. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study is approved by Wales Research Ethics Committee #5 (22/WA/0044). Outcomes will be shared with key stakeholders, published in peer-reviewed journals and presented at national and international conferences.This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) licence, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build on this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial.
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.