Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38149101›Full record

ArticleJAMIA open2023

Feasibility of implementing patient-reported outcome measures into routine breast cancer care delivery using a novel collection and reporting platform.

Elena Tsangaris, Colby Hyland, George Liang, Joanna O'Gorman, Dany Thorpe Huerta, Ellen Kim, Maria Edelen, Andrea Pusic

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JAMIA open, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Strategies to promote the dissemination of psychosocial digital health resources for those affected by cancer: scoping review.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2026
    Article
  3. Observational
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
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

8 authors.

Elena TsangarisDivision of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Department of Surgery, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA 02115, United States.
Colby HylandDivision of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Department of Surgery, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA 02115, United States.
George LiangDivision of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Department of Surgery, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA 02115, United States.
Joanna O'GormanDivision of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Department of Surgery, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA 02115, United States.
Dany Thorpe HuertaDivision of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Department of Surgery, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA 02115, United States.
Ellen KimDivision of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Department of Surgery, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA 02115, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9379-0192
Maria EdelenDivision of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Department of Surgery, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA 02115, United States.
Andrea PusicDivision of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Department of Surgery, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA 02115, United States.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objectives: imPROVE is a new Health Information Technology platform that enables systematic patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) collection through a mobile phone application. The purpose of this study is to describe our initial experience and approach to implementing imPROVE among breast cancer patients treated in breast and plastic surgery clinics. Materials and Methods: We describe our initial implementation in 4 phases between June 2021 and February 2022: preimplementation, followed by 3 consecutive implementation periods (P1, P2, P3). The Standards for Reporting Implementation Studies statement guided this study. Iterative Plan-Do-Study-Act (PDSA) cycles supported implementation, and success was evaluated using the Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, and Maintenance framework. Results: Qualitative interviews conducted during the preimplementation phase elicited 4 perceived implementation barriers. Further feedback collected during each phase of implementation resulted in the development of brochures, posters in clinic spaces, and scripts for clinic staff to streamline discussions with patients, and the resolution of technical issues concerning patient login capabilities, such as compatibility with cell phone software and barriers to downloading imPROVE. Feedback also generated ideas for facilitating provider interpretation of PROM results. By the end of P3, 2961 patients were eligible, 1375 (46.4%) downloaded imPROVE, and 1070 (36.1% of those eligible, 78% of those who downloaded) completed at least 1 PROM. Discussion and Conclusion: Implementation efforts across 2 surgical departments at 2 academic teaching hospitals enabled collaboration across clinical specialties and longitudinal PROM reporting for patients receiving breast cancer care; the implementation effort also highlighted patient difficulties with mobile app-based PROM collection, particularly around initial engagement.

Indexed as

breast cancerclinical careimplementationimprovepatient-reported outcomes

Identifiers

PMID38149101
PMCPMC10750814

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.