Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38214761›Full record

ReviewSupportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer2024

The first steps in the development of a cancer-specific patient-reported experience measure item bank (PREM-item bank): towards dynamic evaluation of experiences.

Kira S van Hof, Karolijn Dulfer, Aniel Sewnaik, Robert J Baatenburg de Jong, Marinella P J Offerman

Open access · hybridAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
13.6field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Mapping methods and tools for measuring patient experience in oncology settings: a scoping review.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Understanding experiences of optimal survivorship care: findings from a population-based study of cancer survivors.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2025
    Article
  7. 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

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Kira S van HofDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology and Head and Neck Surgery, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands. k.vanhof@erasmusmc.nl.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4388-8164
Karolijn DulferDepartment of Neonatal & Pediatric Intensive Care, Division of Pediatric Intensive Care, Erasmus MC-Sophia Children's Hospital, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Aniel SewnaikDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology and Head and Neck Surgery, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Robert J Baatenburg de JongDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology and Head and Neck Surgery, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Marinella P J OffermanDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology and Head and Neck Surgery, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Erasmus MC Cancer Institute · NLErasmus MC - Sophia Children’s Hospital · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveSince the implementation of value-based healthcare, there has been a growing emphasis on utilizing patient-reported experience measures (PREMs) to enhance the quality of care. However, the current PREMs are primarily generic and static, whereas healthcare is constantly evolving and encompasses a wide variety of aspects that impact care quality. To continuously improve care requires a dynamic PREM. The aim of this study was to propose an item bank for the establishment of a dynamic and care-specific patient-reported evaluation.

methodsIn co-creation with patients, a mixed methods study was conducted involving: (1) an explorative review of the literature, (2) a focus group analysis with (ex-)patients, (3) qualitative analyses to formulate themes, and (4) a quantitative selection of items by patients and experts through prioritization.

resultsEight existing PREMs were evaluated. After removing duplicates, 141 items were identified. Through qualitative analyses of the focus group in which the patient journey was discussed, eight themes were formulated: "Organization of healthcare," "Competence of healthcare professionals," "Communication," "Information & services," "Patient empowerment," "Continuity & informal care," "Environment," and "Technology." Seven patients and eleven professionals were asked to prioritize what they considered the most important items. From this, an item bank with 76 items was proposed.

conclusionIn collaboration with patients and healthcare professionals, we have proposed a PREM-item bank to evaluate the experiences of patients' receiving cancer care in an outpatient clinic. This item bank is the first step to dynamically assess the quality of cancer care provided in an outpatient setting.

Indexed as

Ambulatory Care FacilitiesNeoplasmsDelivery of Health CareFocus GroupsHumansOutpatientsPatient Reported Outcome MeasuresSurveys and QuestionnairesHead and neck cancerItem bankPatient journeyPatient-reported experience measure

Identifiers

PMID38214761
PMCPMC10786971
OpenAlexW4390793000

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.