ArticleQuality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation2025
Patient involvement in the development of patient-reported outcome measures used following hip or knee arthroplasty: a scoping review.
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. 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
purposeInvolving patients in developing patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) is essential for accurately capturing their perspectives. However, understanding how patients were involved in developing PROMs used after hip or knee arthroplasty is limited. This scoping review aimed to evaluate whether patients were involved in the development of these PROMs and how they were involved.
methodsTwo independent reviewers documented patient involvement in item development and comprehensibility testing for 50 PROMs used after hip or knee arthroplasty. Trends in patient involvement over time were analyzed using binary logistic regression.
resultsThere was no documentation of patient involvement in a collaborative role during the PROM development processes. Regarding the consultative role, of these 26 PROMs, they contributed to item development in 13 PROMs (26%) and comprehensibility testing in four PROMs (8%) and both item development and comprehensibility testing in nine PROMs (18%). Patients who underwent arthroplasty were involved in one or both phases in ten PROMs (20%), while patients with other lower extremity conditions were involved in 16 PROMs (32%). Patients who underwent arthroplasty contributed to both phases in five PROMs: Oxford Knee Score-Activity and Participation Questionnaire, Patient's Knee Implant Performance Questionnaire, Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System R-Plus-Osteoarthritis of the Knee, Oxford Arthroplasty Early Recovery Score and Oxford Arthroplasty Early Change Score. In addition, our analysis revealed no significant change in patient involvement in a consultative role during either item development or comprehensibility evaluation over time since 1982, when the first PROM included in this review was developed (p = 0.21).
conclusionsAlmost half of PROMs used after arthroplasty did not involve patients in their development, highlighting the need to address this gap in development of PROMs. There is also a need to analyze PROMs to ensure they accurately reflect the outcomes that matter to patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39869265What 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.