ArticleJCO clinical cancer informatics2024
Perceptions of Implementing Real-Time Electronic Patient-Reported Outcomes and Digital Analytics in a Majority-Minority Cancer Center.
Article in JCO clinical cancer informatics, 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.
- Pharmacist-led interventions associated with symptoms identified by electronic patient-reported outcome battery: A descriptive study.Journal of oncology pharmacy practice : official publication of the International Society of Oncology Pharmacy Practitioners · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeElectronic patient-reported outcome (ePRO) tools are increasingly used to provide first-hand information on patient's symptoms and quality of life. This study explored how patients and health care providers (HCPs) perceive the use of a digital real-time ePRO tool, coupled with digital analytics at a cancer center located in a majority-minority county. Furthermore, we described the implementation barriers and facilitators identified from the participants' perspectives.
methodsWe conducted a qualitative substudy as part of a larger implementation study conducted at University of California Irvine Chao Family Comprehensive Cancer Center. Patients and HCPs completed semistructured interviews and a focus group discussion. Thematic analysis was used to identify key themes regarding perceived impact of the intervention on patient's care and implementation factors.
resultsA total of 31 participants, comprising 15 patients (67% English-speaking, 33% Spanish-speaking) and 16 HCPs (43.8% pharmacists, 37.5% physicians, 18.8% nurses), were interviewed. The utilization of real-time ePRO was perceived to beneficially affect patient care, improve patient-provider communication, and increase symptom awareness. Implementation facilitators included ease of comprehension and completion within the infusion center. Barriers included the need to incorporate results in electronic medical records and create real-time referral pathways to address patient's needs.
conclusionThe use of real-time ePRO in a majority-minority population was perceived to enhance patient-centered oncology care, yet implementation barriers must be addressed for successful integration in clinical settings. The findings from this study may inform implementation strategies to reduce health disparities.
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.