ArticleJournal of medical radiation sciences2026
Healthcare Professional Perspectives on Digital Health-Related Quality-of-Life Assessment in Paediatric Radiation Therapy: A Qualitative Study.
Article in Journal of medical radiation sciences, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Continuing Professional Development - Radiation Therapy.Journal of medical radiation sciences · 2026Article
- Healthcare Professional Perspectives on Digital Health-Related Quality-of-Life Assessment in Paediatric Radiation Therapy: A Qualitative Study.Journal of medical radiation sciences · 2026Article
- Development and Evaluation of an Electronic Patient-Reported Outcome Platform for Children Undergoing Radiation Therapy.Journal of medical radiation sciences · 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
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionHealth-related quality of life (HRQoL) is not routinely evaluated using patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in paediatric radiation therapy (RT). This study aimed to identify barriers and facilitators to HRQoL implementation in paediatric RT clinical practice and requirements for a digital PROM platform, from the perspectives of healthcare professionals.
methodExploratory semi-structured interviews were conducted with multidisciplinary clinicians from two hospitals providing care to paediatric RT patients. Interviews were transcribed verbatim, descriptively coded and analysed using content analysis. Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) was used as a theoretical framework for data collection, analysis and interpretation.
resultsNine interviews were held with nurses (n = 3), radiation therapists (n = 3), radiation oncology registrars (n = 2) and a consultant family therapist. Participants identified digital, clinical and child-friendly features to inform platform development. All participants recognised the proposed digital platform to be of value by generating new information to support patient care. The perceived alignment with clinical workflows, potential to provide staff satisfaction and individual scope to act on PROM results were key facilitators. Clinical time pressures, transient staffing and reluctance for change were identified as potential barriers. Engagement of clinical staff and training in addressing psychosocial concerns were recommended to support clinical actioning of results and foster successful clinical uptake.
conclusionThis study used CFIR to systematically identify requirements for a digital platform and barriers to routine patient-reported HRQoL collection in the paediatric RT setting. The facilitators and complexities of PROM implementation can inform platform development and future implementation strategies.
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.