ArticleFrontiers in pediatrics2024
Achieving reliable patient reported outcomes collection to measure health care improvement in a learning health network: lessons from pediatric rheumatology care and outcomes improvement network.
Article in Frontiers in pediatrics, 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.
- Qualitative study of patient-reported outcome data collection among clinicians in dermatology at a single academic center.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Data from the Pediatric Rheumatology Care and Outcomes Improvement Network (PR-COIN) registry suggests that reliable collection of patient-reported outcomes (PROs) varies across sites. The objective of this study was to better understand the practices of collecting PROs at PR-COIN sites. Methods: A REDCap survey was sent to the lead representative for each PR-COIN site. Registry data were analyzed to better understand the completion rates of PROs. Interviews of physician leaders of high performing sites were conducted by videoconference, audiotranscribed and themes were summarized. Quantitative data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and qualitative data were thematically analyzed. Results: All 23 PR-COIN sites responded to the survey. PROs were collected by 21/23 (91%) sites. Arthritis-related pain intensity, morning stiffness, and physical function were the top three collected PROs ( Supplementary 3 and 4). PROs were collected using paper, electronically or in combination, with most sites collecting PROs only on paper. PROs were manually scored at most sites. Among sites with electronic PRO collection, 42% did not have automatic transfer of scores into the electronic medical record. Facilitators to successful collection of PROs included availability of staff, training, and culture. Barriers to PRO collection cited were limited time, lack of infrastructure, and lack of staff. Completion rates of PROs in the registry in top 4 performing centers for morning stiffness was 100%, overall well-being and pain intensity scores ranged from 93%-98%, and for physical function 69%-94%. Interviews with physician leaders indicated that their site overcame barriers through: integration of PRO collection into workflow, gaining buy-in of stakeholders (clinicians and patients), and automating PRO collection. Interviewees endorsed automation of data collection (e.g., self-completion on tablets) and automated transfer to electronic medical record (EMR) as key components enabling reliable PRO collection. Conclusions: Through understanding our current ability to systematically collect PROs across all sites in PR-COIN and exploring successful implementation of PRO collection both within and outside our learning health network, we share lessons learned and identify the most influential factors for successful PRO collection in pediatric rheumatology.
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.