Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38207229›Full record

ArticleJCO oncology practice2024

Implementing a Patient-Reported Outcome Dashboard in Oncology Telemedicine Encounters: Clinician and Patient Adoption and Acceptability.

Nisha A Mohindra, Ava Coughlin, Sheetal Kircher, Alesia O'Daniel, Cynthia Barnard, Kenzie A Cameron, Lisa R Hirschhorn, David Cella

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JCO oncology practice, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
4.2field-weighted citation impact, top 7% of its field
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, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Nisha A MohindraDivision of Hematology and Oncology, Department of Medicine, Feinberg School of Medicine, Northwestern University, Chicago, IL.ORCID 0000-0001-5913-1716
Ava CoughlinDepartment of Medical Social Sciences, Feinberg School of Medicine, Northwestern University, Chicago, IL.ORCID 0000-0002-4048-4295
Sheetal KircherDivision of Hematology and Oncology, Department of Medicine, Feinberg School of Medicine, Northwestern University, Chicago, IL.ORCID 0000-0002-3429-6378
Alesia O'DanielNorthwestern Memorial Health Care, Chicago, IL.
Cynthia BarnardNorthwestern Memorial Health Care, Chicago, IL.ORCID 0000-0002-5522-2407
Kenzie A CameronRobert H. Lurie Comprehensive Cancer Center, Northwestern University, Chicago, IL.
Lisa R HirschhornDepartment of Medical Social Sciences, Feinberg School of Medicine, Northwestern University, Chicago, IL.
David CellaRobert H. Lurie Comprehensive Cancer Center, Northwestern University, Chicago, IL.ORCID 0000-0002-9881-4541
Northwestern University · USNorthwestern Medicine · US

Funding

AHRQ HHS K12 HS026385
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTelemedicine provides numerous benefits to patients, yet effective communication and symptom assessment remain a concern. The recent uptake of telemedicine provided an opportunity to use a newly developed dashboard with patient-reported outcome (PRO) information to enhance communication and shared decision making (SDM) during telemedicine appointments. The objective of this study was to identify barriers to using the dashboard during telemedicine, develop implementation strategies to address barriers, and pilot test use of this dashboard during telemedicine appointments in two practice settings to evaluate acceptability, adoption, fidelity, and effectiveness.

methodsPatients and clinicians were interviewed to identify determinants to dashboard use in telemedicine. Implementation strategies were designed and refined through iterative feedback from stakeholders. A pilot study of dashboard use was conducted from March to September 2022. Acceptability, adoption, and fidelity were evaluated using mixed methods. SDM was evaluated using the collaboRATE measure.

resultsOne hundred two patient encounters were evaluated. Most patients (62; 60%) had completed some PRO data at the time of their telemedicine encounter. Most (82; 80%) encounters had clinician confirmation that PRO data had been reviewed; however, collaborative review of the dashboard was documented in only 27%. Degree of SDM was high (mean collaboRATE score 3.40; SD, 0.11 [95% CI, 3.17 to 3.63] out of a maximum score of 4). Implementation strategies focused on patient engagement, education, and remote PRO completion. Clinician-facing strategies included education, practice facilitation, and small tests of change.

conclusionThis study demonstrated that implementation of a PRO-based dashboard into telemedicine appointments was feasible and had acceptable adoption and acceptability by patients and clinicians when several strategies were used to engage end users. Strategies targeting both patients and clinicians are needed to support routine and effective PRO integration in telemedicine.

Indexed as

TelemedicineDecision Making, SharedHumansMedical OncologyPatient Reported Outcome MeasuresPilot Projects

Identifiers

PMID38207229
PMCPMC11005901
OpenAlexW4390792500

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.