ArticleHealth science reports2025
Using Patient-Reported Outcomes in Two Program Examples Measuring Health Status in Primary Care: An Observational Study.
Article in Health science reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Background and Aims: Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are increasingly used in primary care practices; however, the broad characteristics of this population pose unique challenges. Generic PROMs (e.g., EQ-5D-5L) measure general health status from the patient's perspective, contributing towards a comprehensive evaluation of health programming. This study describes the integration of the EQ-5D-5L within program evaluation in primary care in Alberta, Canada, using two program examples. Methods: A retrospective, longitudinal, observational design was used. The Edmonton O-day'min Primary Care Network (EOPCN) routinely collects the EQ-5D-5L in their exercise and active living and nutrition programs. Data collected between January 1, 2021 and March 31, 2022 was analyzed descriptively, by dimension, index, and visual analog scale (VAS) scores. Minimally important differences were used to interpret index (0.04) and VAS scores (7.0) and the Pareto Classification of Health Change was applied to the dimensions. Effect size of change in index and VAS scores and population comparisons were examined. Results: In the exercise and active living program ( Conclusion: These results inform future programming, to help patient needs.
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.