Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39179941›Full record

ArticleQuality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation2025

Agreement between patient- and proxy-reported outcome measures in adult musculoskeletal trauma and injury: a scoping review.

Jochem H Raats, Noa H M Ponds, D T Brameier, P A Bain, H J Schuijt, D van der Velde, M J Weaver

Abstract readScoping Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

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

  1. Significant other reported outcome measures within European cohorts of severely injured patients: A systematic review.European journal of trauma and emergency surgery : official publication of the European Trauma Society · 2026
    Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. 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

7 authors.

Jochem H RaatsBrigham and Women's Hospital, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, 75 Francis St, Boston, MA, 02115, USA. jh.raats@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0002-1531-4857
Noa H M PondsBrigham and Women's Hospital, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, 75 Francis St, Boston, MA, 02115, USA.
D T BrameierBrigham and Women's Hospital, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, 75 Francis St, Boston, MA, 02115, USA.
P A BainCountway Library of Medicine, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
H J SchuijtDepartment of Surgery, Antonius Hospital, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
D van der VeldeDepartment of Surgery, Antonius Hospital, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
M J WeaverBrigham and Women's Hospital, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, 75 Francis St, Boston, MA, 02115, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposePatient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are widely used in medicine. As older adults, who may rely on a proxy caregiver for answers due to cognitive impairment, are representing an increasing share of the traumatically injured patient population, proxy-reported outcome measures (proxROMs) offer a valuable alternative source of patient-centered information although its association with PROMs is unclear. The objective of this scoping review is to discuss all available literature comparing PROM and proxROMs in adult patients with musculoskeletal trauma to guide future research in this field.

methodsThe PRISMA extension for Scoping Reviews was used to guide this review. MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched without date limit for articles comparing PROM and proxROMs in setting of musculoskeletal trauma. Abstract and full-text screening were performed by two independent reviewers. Variables included study details, patient and proxy characteristics, and reported findings on agreement between PROMs and proxROMs.

resultsOf 574 unique records screened, 13 were included. Patient and proxy characteristics varied greatly, while patients' cognitive status and type of proxy perspective were poorly addressed. 18 different PROMs were evaluated, mostly reporting on physical functioning and disability (nine, 50%) or quality of life (six, 33%). Injury- and proxy-specific tools were rare, and psychometric properties of PROMs were often not described. Studies reported moderate to good agreement between PROMs and proxROMs. There is less agreement on subjective outcome measures (e.g., depression score) compared to observable items, and proxy bias results in in worse outcomes compared to patient self-reports.

conclusionCurrent literature, though limited, demonstrates moderate to good agreement between injured patients' self- and proxy-reports. Future studies should be mindful of current guidelines on proxy reporting when developing their studies and consider including neglected populations such as cognitively impaired patients to improve clinical validity.

Indexed as

Musculoskeletal SystemPatient Reported Outcome MeasuresProxyWounds and InjuriesAdultHumansMaleQuality of LifeGeriatric traumaMusculoskeletal injuryOrthopedic traumaPatient-reported outcome measureProxy agreementProxy-reported outcome measure

Identifiers

PMID39179941

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.