ArticlePEC innovation2023
The added value of the artificial intelligence patient-reported experience measure (AI-PREM tool) in clinical practise: Deployment in a vestibular schwannoma care pathway.
Article in PEC innovation, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The impact of artificial intelligence in the diagnosis and management of acoustic neuroma: A systematic review.Technology and health care : official journal of the European Society for Engineering and Medicine · 2024Pooled it
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: Patient-reported experience measures (PREMs) can be used for the improvement of quality of care. In this study, the outcome of an open-ended question PREM combined with computer-assisted analysis is compared to the outcome of a closed-ended PREM questionnaire. Methods: This survey study assessed the outcome of the open-ended questionnaire PREM and a close-ended question PREM of patients with unilateral vestibular schwannoma in a tertiary vestibular schwannoma expert centre. Results: The open-ended questions PREM, consisting of five questions, was completed by 507 participants and resulted in 1508 positive and 171 negative comments, categorised into 27 clusters. The close-ended questions PREM results were mainly positive (overall experience graded as 8/10), but did not identify specific action points. Patients who gave high overall scores (>8) on the close-ended question provided points for improvement in the open-ended question PREM, which would have been missed using the close-ended questions only. Conclusions: Compared to the close-ended question PREM, the open-ended question PREM provides more detailed and specific information about the patient experience in the vestibular schwannoma care pathway. Innovation: Automated analysis of feedback with the open-ended question PREM revealed relevant insights and identified topics for targeted quality improvement, whereas the close-ended PREM did not.
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.