ArticleMedical care2024
Assessing Whole-Person Outcomes During Routine Clinical Care: A Rapid Scoping Review.
Article in Medical care, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Measuring What Matters Most: Considering the Well-Being of the Whole Person in Health Care.Medical care · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo identify and describe research conducted on the implementation, validity, and utility of whole-person outcome measures administered during routine inpatient or outpatient care.
backgroundIncorporating information about patients' overall health, health-related quality of life, and global well-being into health care delivery has the potential to increase referral rates, enhance doctor-patient communication, and improve the detection of untreated symptoms. Assessment of these whole-person outcomes during routine clinical care is of broad interest to health care providers and health systems.
methodsWe employed a scoping review design and searched Ovid MEDLINE, APA PsycINFO, and CINAHL for relevant English-language primary studies and systematic reviews published through November 13, 2023. Screening for inclusion and data abstraction were conducted by 1 investigator then checked by another. Study risks of bias and the strength of available evidence were not assessed.
resultsOf 1327 potentially relevant publications, 44 primary studies and 5 systematic reviews met eligibility criteria. Assessment of global well-being was comparatively less researched than overall health or health-related quality of life. Available research provided a range of perspectives on the performance, feasibility, acceptability, implementation, and clinical utility of whole-person outcome measures. No studies reported change in patient health or disease outcomes attributed to whole person outcome assessment (directly or through changes to care delivery).
conclusionsCurrently available evidence provides insights about the performance and implementation of whole-person outcome measures during routine clinical care, but no studies are available that examine the impact of assessing whole-person outcomes on clinical or patient outcomes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.