ArticleBMC palliative care2023
Barriers and facilitators of electronic patient-reported outcome measures (e-PROMs) for patients in home palliative cancer care: a qualitative study of healthcare professionals' perceptions.
Article in BMC palliative care, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Implementing patient-centred outcome measures in palliative care clinical practice. An updated systematic review of facilitators and barriers.BMC palliative care · 2026Pooled it
- Remote usage of digital patient-reported outcome measures for shoulder and elbow pathologies: a systematic review.JSES reviews, reports, and techniques · 2026Review
- Mobile Health in Home-Based Palliative Care: Realist Review of Contextual Factors and Mechanisms Influencing Outcomes.JMIR mHealth and uHealth · 2026Review
- Implementation of patient-reported outcomes in personalized lung cancer care: a qualitative study from the perspective of patients and health care providers.Journal of patient-reported outcomes · 2026Article
- Barriers and facilitators of implementing patient-reported outcome measures in clinical care using the CFIR-ERIC framework.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Patients' experiences of responding to a Patient-Reported Outcome Measure for palliative care: a mixed method study.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2025Article
- Healthcare professionals' perspectives on assessing selected patient-reported outcome measures in specialist palliative care institutions: a multi-country mixed-methods study.BMC palliative care · 2025Article
- Comparing EQ-5D-5L and IPOS among residents with malignant tumors in a community home hospice: a longitudinal study.BMC palliative care · 2025Article
- Implementation of the e-IPOS in Home Palliative Cancer Care: A Quasiexperimental Pilot Study.The American journal of hospice & palliative care · 2025Article
- Facilitators and barriers to implementing patient-reported outcomes in clinical oncology practice: a systematic review based on the consolidated framework for implementation research.Implementation science communications · 2024Review
- Experience or perception: What healthcare providers need when using the Utrecht Symptom Diary-4 Dimensional, a mixed-methods study.Palliative care and social practice · 2024Article
- Article
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
backgroundPatient-reported outcomes in palliative care enable early monitoring and management of symptoms that most impact patients' daily lives; however, there are several barriers to adopting electronic Patient-reported Outcome Measures (e-PROMs) in daily practice. This study explored the experiences of health care professionals (HCPs) regarding potential barriers and facilitators in implementing e-PROMs in palliative cancer care at home.
methodsThis was a qualitative descriptive study. The data were collected from two focus groups structured according to the conceptual framework of Grol. HCPs involved in home palliative cancer care of Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori of Milan were enrolled. Data were analyzed using a reflexive thematic analysis.
resultsA total of 245 codes were generated, 171 for the first focus group and 74 for the second focus group. The results were subdivided into subthemes according to Grol's themes: Innovation, Individual professional, Patient, Social context, Organizational context, except Economic Political context. Nine HCPs attended the first focus group, and ten attended the second. According to these participants, e-PROMs could be integrated into clinical practice after adequate training and support of HCPs at all stages of implementation. They identified barriers, especially in the social and organizational contexts, due to the uniqueness of the oncological end-of-life setting and the intangible care interventions, as well as many facilitators for the innovation that these tools bring and for improved communication with the patient and the healthcare team.
conclusionse-PROMs are perceived by HCPs as adding value to patient care and their work; however, barriers remain especially related to the fragility of these patients, the adequacy of technological systems, lack of education, and the risk of low humanization of care.
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.