Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38839681›Full record

ArticleQuality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation2024

What are the perspectives of patients with hand and wrist conditions, chronic pain, and patients recovering from stroke on the use of patient and outcome information in everyday care? A Mixed-Methods study.

Grada R Arends, Nina L Loos, Yara E van Kooij, Kasia Tabeau, Willemijn A de Ridder, Ruud W Selles, Joris Veltkamp, Outcome-Based Healthcare Research Group, Robbert M Wouters

Erratum issuedAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

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

  1. Factors associated with response to patient-reported outcome measures: a systematic review of systematic and scoping reviews, and meta-analyses.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2026
    Pooled it
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Grada R ArendsDepartment of Rehabilitation Medicine, Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, The Netherlands. g.arends@erasmusmc.nl.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6541-8657
Nina L LoosDepartment of Rehabilitation Medicine, Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Yara E van KooijDepartment of Rehabilitation Medicine, Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8274-9215
Kasia TabeauErasmus School of Health Policy and Management, Erasmus University Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5331-2994
Willemijn A de RidderDepartment of Rehabilitation Medicine, Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5169-8555
Ruud W SellesDepartment of Rehabilitation Medicine, Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2432-6756
Joris VeltkampDepartment of Rehabilitation Medicine, Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Outcome-Based Healthcare Research Group
Robbert M WoutersDepartment of Rehabilitation Medicine, Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0674-4804

Funding

ZonMw 05160472110006
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo evaluate the patients' perspectives on the use of patient- and outcome information tools in everyday care and to investigate which characteristics affect general understanding and perceived value of patient- and outcome information.

methodsThis mixed-methods study included surveys and interviews on understanding, experience, decision-support, and perceived value in patients with hand and wrist conditions and chronic pain. We synthesized our quantitative and qualitative findings using a triangulation protocol and identified factors independently associated with general understanding and perceived value of patient- and outcome information using hierarchical logistic regression.

resultsWe included 3379 patients. The data triangulation indicated that patients understand the outcome information, they find it valuable, it supports decision-making, and it improves patient-clinician interaction. The following variables were independently associated with better general understanding: having more difficulty with questionnaires (standardized odds ratio 0.34 [95%-CI 031-0.38]), having a finger condition (0.72 [0.57-0.92]), longer follow-up (0.75 [0.61-0.91]), and undergoing surgical treatment (ref: non-surgical treatment, 1.33 [1.11-1.59]). For more general value, these were: having more difficulty with questionnaires (0.40 [0.36-0.44]), having a wrist condition (0.71 [0.54-0.92]), better hand function (1.12 [1.02-1.22]), and requiring help with questionnaires (1.65 [1.33-2.05]).

conclusionPatients value the use of patient- and outcome information tools in daily care and find it easy to understand. The factors associated with understanding and value can be targeted to personalized and value-based healthcare. We recommend using outcome information to improve patient independence, empowerment, and involvement in decision-making.

Indexed as

Chronic PainAdultAgedFemaleHandHumansInterviews as TopicMaleMiddle AgedQualitative ResearchQuality of LifeStrokeStroke RehabilitationSurveys and QuestionnairesWristDecision supportPatient-centered carePatient-reported outcome measuresValue-based healthcare

Identifiers

PMID38839681
PMCPMC11390777

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.