ArticleBMJ open2023
Patient-reported outcomes in clinical HIV care: protocol for a single-centre, multistage, mixed-methods study in Denmark.
Article in BMJ open, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
introductionPeople with HIV-1 (PWH) have worse health-related quality of life (HRQoL) compared with the general population. Using patient-reported outcomes (PROs) may help reorient the focus of HIV care towards improving HRQoL. This study aims to develop, implement and evaluate the use of PROs in HIV care. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This is a Danish single-centre, multistage mixed-methods study consisting of four substudies (studies I-IV). Study I is a qualitative focus group interview study aiming to identify relevant PRO domains, and barriers and benefits to PRO use. Participants are 5-10 PWH and 5-10 HIV healthcare providers (HCPs). Data are thematically analysed. Results will guide the design of a PRO measure (PROM). Study II is a quantitative study aiming to assess PWH's willingness and ability to engage with PRO. All PWH are consecutively invited to complete the PROMs before their next consultations. Demographic data are collected at enrolment. Differences between PWH who do/do not complete the PROMs are assessed. Study III is a quantitative before-and-after study aiming to assess the impact of PRO use on HCP awareness. Participants are all who complete the PROMs in Study II. In contrast to study II, HCPs are notified of the PROM results. The number of problems documented by the HCP in patients' medical records during studies II and III are compared using χ ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study is approved by the Danish Data Protection Agency. Participants will provide written consent prior to participation. Results will be published in peer-reviewed journals.
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.