Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40279025›Full record

ReviewQuality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation2025

Understanding data visualization techniques in qualitative studies used to develop and validate patient-reported outcome measures: a targeted literature review.

Caroline Seo, Sophia Hu, Bellinda L King-Kallimanis, Ashley E Chang, Antoine Regnault, Amitai S Miller, Manraj N Kaur

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review 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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Caroline Seo *BioPharmaceuticals Medical Evidence, AstraZeneca, Gaithersburg, MD, USA. caroline.seo@astrazeneca.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6964-1311
Sophia Hu *Patient-Reported Outcomes, Value, and Experience (PROVE) Center, Brigham and Women's Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
Bellinda L King-KallimanisPatient-Focused Research Center, LUNGevity Foundation, Chicago, IL, USA.
Ashley E ChangDivision of Plastic Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Antoine RegnaultModus Outcomes, Lyon, France.
Amitai S MillerPatient-Reported Outcomes, Value, and Experience (PROVE) Center, Brigham and Women's Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
Manraj N KaurPatient-Reported Outcomes, Value, and Experience (PROVE) Center, Brigham and Women's Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeQualitative data that reflects patients' experiences are the foundation of any patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) development and validation study; however, there is limited understanding of the type of data visualization techniques that facilitate communication of this data. The goal of this targeted literature review was to investigate data visualization methods that have been used in published PROM development and validation literature to report qualitative results.

methodsA literature search in OVID via MEDLINE was conducted among the top 10 non-disease-specific journals publishing PROM qualitative development and validation studies. Studies that reported qualitative methods to develop/validate a PROM and included data visualization in the form of tables or figures were included. Article characteristics and data visualization types were extracted.

resultsA total of 185 articles were included in data extraction. Most articles (n = 109, 59.1%) included figures (n = 172, average 2 relevant figures per article) in the form of hierarchy/flowcharts (n = 124, 72.1%) and bar charts (n = 29, 16.9%). Information reported in figures included depiction of conceptual frameworks (n = 112, 65.1%) and concept frequency (n = 40, 24.4%). Most articles (n = 152, 81.7%) included tables (n = 307, average 2 relevant tables per article). Information reported in tables included concept frequency (n = 133, 43.3%) and cognitive debriefing and revisions (n = 91, 29.6%).

conclusionData visualization techniques used to report qualitative results in the identified PROM qualitative development and validation studies were heterogeneous, and many studies did not utilize any data visualization techniques. This study will inform the development of guidance for using data visualizations to report qualitative PROM research.

Indexed as

Data VisualizationPatient Reported Outcome MeasuresQualitative ResearchHumansQuality of LifeReproducibility of ResultsData visualizationDevelopmentPatient-reported outcomeQualitativeValidation

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.