Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38010558›Full record

ArticleJournal of patient-reported outcomes2023

The impact of COVID-19 on PRO development, collection and implementation: views of UK and Ireland professionals.

Patricia Holch, Grace Turner, Anju D Keetharuth, E Gibbons, Kim Cocks, Kate L Absolom

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of patient-reported outcomes, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Observational
  2. Impact of COVID-19 on early identification of protein-energy malnutrition in the cancer care setting: a repeated cross-sectional survey of cancer care professionals.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2026
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Patricia HolchDepartment of Psychology, School of Humanities and Social Sciences, Leeds Beckett University, Portland Building, Room PD402, City Campus, Leeds, LS1 9HE, UK. t.holch@leedsbeckett.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0002-4255-8315
Grace TurnerInstitute of Applied Health Research, College of Medical and Dental Sciences, University of Birmingham, Edgbaston, Birmingham, B15 2TT, UK.
Anju D KeetharuthSchool of Health and Related Research, Regent Court, 30 Regent Street, Sheffield, S1 4DA, UK.
E GibbonsEvidera Ltd, 201 Talgarth Rd, The Ark, London, W6 8BJ, UK.
Kim CocksAdelphi Values, Patient-Centered Outcomes, Bollington, Cheshire, SK10 5JB, UK.
Kate L AbsolomLeeds Institute of Medical Research, University of Leeds, St James's Hospital, Bexley Wing, Beckett Street, Leeds, LS9 7TF, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPROs are valuable tools in clinical care to capture patients' perspectives of their health, symptoms and quality of life. However the COVID-19 pandemic has had profound impacts on all aspects of life, in particular healthcare and research. This study explores the views of UK and Irish health professionals, third sector and pharmaceutical industry representatives and academic researchers on the impact of COVID-19 on PRO collection, use and development in clinical practice.

methodsA volunteer sample took part in a 10 question cross sectional qualitative survey, on the impact of COVID-19, administered online via Qualtrics. Demographic data was descriptively analysed, and the qualitative free text response data was subject to thematic analysis and summarised within the Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats (SWOT) framework.

resultsForty nine participants took part located in a range of UK settings and professions. Participants highlighted staff strengths during the pandemic including colleagues' flexibility and ability to work collaboratively and the adoption of novel communication tools. Weaknesses were a lack of staff capacity to continue or start PRO projects and insufficient digital infrastructure to continue studies online. Opportunities included the added interest in PROs as useful outcomes, the value of electronic PROs for staff and patients particularly in relation to integration into systems and the electronic patient records. However, these opportunities came with an understanding that digital exclusion may be an issue for patient groups. Threats identified included that the majority of PRO research was stopped or delayed and funding streams were cut.

conclusionsAlthough most PRO research was on hold during the pandemic, the consensus from participants was that PROs as meaningful outcomes were valued more than ever. From the opportunities afforded by the pandemic the development of electronic PROs and their integration into electronic patient record systems and clinical practice could be a lasting legacy from the COVID-19 pandemic.

Indexed as

COVID-19Cross-Sectional StudiesHumansIrelandPandemicsQuality of LifeUnited Kingdom

Identifiers

PMID38010558
PMCPMC10682296

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.