Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39049991›Full record

ArticleJAMIA open2024

Development of an electronic health record-integrated patient-reported outcome-based shared decision-making dashboard in oncology.

Nisha A Mohindra, Sofia F Garcia, Sheetal Kircher, Cynthia Barnard, Laura M Perry, Madison Lyleroehr, Ava Coughlin, Victoria Morken, Ryan Chmiel, Lisa R Hirschhorn and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JAMIA open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing 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

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

  1. Assessment measures for chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy among pediatric oncology patients: an updated systematic review.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2025
    Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. 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

11 authors.

Nisha A MohindraDivision of Hematology and Oncology, Department of Medicine, Feinberg School of Medicine, Northwestern University, Chicago, IL 60611, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5913-1716
Sofia F GarciaRobert H. Lurie Comprehensive Cancer Center, Northwestern University, Chicago, IL 60611, United States.
Sheetal KircherDivision of Hematology and Oncology, Department of Medicine, Feinberg School of Medicine, Northwestern University, Chicago, IL 60611, United States.
Cynthia BarnardNorthwestern Medicine/Northwestern Memorial Health Care, Chicago, IL 60611, United States.
Laura M PerryRobert H. Lurie Comprehensive Cancer Center, Northwestern University, Chicago, IL 60611, United States.
Madison LyleroehrDepartment of Medical Social Sciences, Feinberg School of Medicine, Northwestern University, Chicago, IL 60611, United States.
Ava CoughlinDepartment of Medical Social Sciences, Feinberg School of Medicine, Northwestern University, Chicago, IL 60611, United States.
Victoria MorkenDepartment of Medical Social Sciences, Feinberg School of Medicine, Northwestern University, Chicago, IL 60611, United States.
Ryan ChmielNorthwestern Medicine/Northwestern Memorial Health Care, Chicago, IL 60611, United States.
Lisa R HirschhornDepartment of Medical Social Sciences, Feinberg School of Medicine, Northwestern University, Chicago, IL 60611, United States.
David CellaRobert H. Lurie Comprehensive Cancer Center, Northwestern University, Chicago, IL 60611, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9881-4541

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objectives: Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) describe a patient's unique experiences with disease or treatment, yet effective use of this information during clinical encounters remains challenging. This project sought to build a PRO based dashboard within the electronic health record (EHR), prioritizing interpretability and utility of PROs for clinical decision-making. Materials and Methods: Codesign principles were used to define the goal, features, and visualization of the data elements on the dashboard. Codesign sessions occurred between February 2019 and May 2020 and involved a diverse group of stakeholders. Pilot evaluation of dashboard usability was performed with patients and clinicians not involved in the codesign process through qualitative interviews and the Systems Usability Scale. Results: The dashboard was placed into a single tab in the EHR and included select PROM scores, clinical data elements, and goals of care questions. Real-time data analytics and enhanced visualization of data was necessary for the dashboard to provide meaningful feedback to clinicians and patients for decision-making during clinic visits. During soft launch, the dashboard demonstrated "good" usability in patients and clinicians at 3 and 6 months (mean total SUS score >70). Discussion: The current dashboard had good usability and made PRO scores more clinically understandable to patients and clinicians. This paper highlights the development, necessary data elements, and workflow considerations to implement this dashboard at an academic cancer center. Conclusion: As the use of PROs in clinical care is increasing, patient- and clinician-centered tools are needed to ensure that this information is used in meaningful ways.

Indexed as

cancerpatient-reported outcomesshared decision-making

Identifiers

PMID39049991
PMCPMC11268523

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.