ArticleJCO clinical cancer informatics2023
Fixing the Leaky Pipe: How to Improve the Uptake of Patient-Reported Outcomes-Based Prognostic and Predictive Models in Cancer Clinical Practice.
Article in JCO clinical cancer informatics, 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, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pooled it
- Trajectories of patient-reported outcomes among diverse cancer patients in ambulatory oncology clinics.Journal of cancer survivorship : research and practice · 2026Article
- Improving Survival Prediction of Head and Neck Cancer Patients by Modeling Long-term Symptom Burden.Proceedings. IEEE International Conference on Healthcare Informatics · 2026Article
- Time-Dynamic AI Models to Predict Quality of Life in Patients With Breast Cancer: Development and Validation Study Using the EORTC BALANCE Cohort.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Development and validation of machine learning models for predicting rehabilitation non-response after knee arthroplasty.Frontiers in rehabilitation sciences · 2026Article
- Development and validation of a prognostic model incorporating patient reported outcomes for advanced gastric and esophageal carcinoma (AGOC) using individual patient data from two AGITG randomized clinical trials.Gastric cancer : official journal of the International Gastric Cancer Association and the Japanese Gastric Cancer Association · 2025Article
- Trajectories of Patient-Reported Outcomes among Diverse Cancer Patients in Ambulatory Oncology Clinics.Research square · 2025Article
- Meaningful differences in patient-reported outcome measurement scores in liver disease.Hepatology communications · 2025Article
- The Role of Patient-Reported Outcomes in Cirrhosis.The American journal of gastroenterology · 2025Review
- The Hallmarks of Predictive Oncology.Cancer discovery · 2025Article
- PRO-Based Stratification Improves Model Prediction for Toxicity and Survival of Head and Neck Cancer Patients.IEEE journal of biomedical and health informatics · 2025Article
- 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
14 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThis discussion paper outlines challenges and proposes solutions for successfully implementing prediction models that incorporate patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in cancer practice.
methodsWe organized a full-day multidisciplinary meeting of people with expertise in cancer care delivery, PRO collection, PRO use in prediction modeling, computing, implementation, and decision science. The discussions presented here focused on identifying challenges to the development, implementation and use of prediction models incorporating PROs, and suggesting possible solutions.
resultsSpecific challenges and solutions were identified across three broad areas. (1) Understanding decision making and implementation: necessitating multidisciplinary collaboration in the early stages and throughout; early stakeholder engagement to define the decision problem and ensure acceptability of PROs in prediction; understanding patient/clinician interpretation of PRO predictions and uncertainty to optimize prediction impact; striving for model integration into existing electronic health records; and early regulatory alignment. (2) Recognizing the limitations to PRO collection and their impact on prediction: incorporating validated, clinically important PROs to maximize model generalizability and clinical engagement; and minimizing missing PRO data (resulting from both structural digital exclusion and time-varying factors) to avoid exacerbating existing inequalities. (3) Statistical and modeling challenges: incorporating statistical methods to address missing data; ensuring predictive modeling recognizes complex causal relationships; and considering temporal and geographic recalibration so that model predictions reflect the relevant population.
conclusionDeveloping and implementing PRO-based prediction models in cancer care requires extensive multidisciplinary working from the earliest stages, recognition of implementation challenges because of PRO collection and model presentation, and robust statistical methods to manage missing data, causality, and calibration. Prediction models incorporating PROs should be viewed as complex interventions, with their development and impact assessment carried out to reflect this.
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.