Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40358948›Full record

ArticleJAMA network open2025

Remote Symptom Monitoring With Electronic Patient-Reported Outcomes in Clinical Cancer Populations.

Gabrielle B Rocque, Jeffrey A Franks, Luqin Deng, Nicole E Caston, Courtney P Williams, Andres Azuero, D'Ambra Dent, Bradford E Jackson, Chelsea McGowan, Nicole L Henderson and 9 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JAMA network open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Factors associated with response to patient-reported outcome measures: a systematic review of systematic and scoping reviews, and meta-analyses.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2026
    Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Patient and staff experiences with an EHR-Integrated Symptom Management Program (eSyM) in oncology.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2025
    Trial
  4. Article
  5. Observational
  6. Telehealth education alone is not enough: toward closed-loop supportive oncology.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2026
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Roles undertaken by family caregivers to help individuals with cancer manage symptoms: a qualitative study of caregivers, patients, and oncology clinicians.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2026
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
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

19 authors.

Gabrielle B RocqueDepartment of Medicine, Division of Hematology and Oncology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham.
Jeffrey A FranksDepartment of Medicine, Division of Hematology and Oncology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham.
Luqin DengDepartment of Medicine, Division of General Internal Medicine and Population Science, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham.
Nicole E CastonLineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill.
Courtney P WilliamsDepartment of Medicine, Division of General Internal Medicine and Population Science, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham.
Andres AzueroO'Neal Comprehensive Cancer Center, Birmingham, Alabama.
D'Ambra DentDepartment of Medicine, Division of Hematology and Oncology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham.
Bradford E JacksonLineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill.
Chelsea McGowanMitchell Cancer Institute, University of South Alabama, Mobile.
Nicole L HendersonDepartment of Medicine, Division of Hematology and Oncology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham.
Chao-Hui Sylvia HuangDepartment of Medicine, Division of Gerontology, Geriatrics and Palliative Care, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham.
Stacey IngramDepartment of Medicine, Division of Hematology and Oncology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham.
J Nicholas OdomO'Neal Comprehensive Cancer Center, Birmingham, Alabama.
Noon EltoumDepartment of Medicine, Division of Hematology and Oncology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham.
Bryan WeinerDepartment of Health Systems and Population Health, University of Washington, Seattle.
Doris HowellSupportive Care, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre Research Institute, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Angela M StoverLineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill.
Jennifer Young PierceMitchell Cancer Institute, University of South Alabama, Mobile.
Ethan M BaschLineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill.

Funding

Re-Entry Supplement: Investigation of Oral Microbial Enzymes for the Detection and Treatment of Periodontal DiseaseUL1TR002489 · NCATS · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI BUSE, JOHN BERNARD, SHAHEEN, NICHOLAS J · 2018 to 2022
$48.6M
North Carolina Translational and Clinical Sciences Institute (NC TraCS)UM1TR004406 · NCATS · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI NICHOLAS J SHAHEEN · 2023 to 2026
$37.5M
UAB Cancer Prevention and Control Training Program (T32)T32CA047888 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF ALABAMA AT BIRMINGHAM · PI Ritu Aneja, Ellen Mary Lavoie Smith · 2018 to 2026
$3.2M
Evaluating the implementation and impact of navigator-delivered ePRO home symptom monitoring and managementR01NR019058 · NINR · UNIVERSITY OF ALABAMA AT BIRMINGHAM · PI ROCQUE, GABRIELLE · 2021 to 2025
$3.1M
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR002489NCATS NIH HHS UM1 TR004406NCI NIH HHS T32 CA047888NINR NIH HHS R01 NR019058
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: Value-based health care increasingly requires electronic patient-reported outcome-based remote symptom monitoring (RSM) to improve health care utilization in patients with cancer. However, data on the impact of RSM in clinical practice are lacking. Objective: To evaluate the association of RSM with 3- and 6-month health care utilization among patients receiving systemic cancer treatment. Design, Setting, and Participants: This nonrandomized controlled trial used a hybrid, type 2 implementation-effectiveness design. Participants were patients with cancer at 2 Alabama-based academic institutions receiving chemotherapy, targeted therapy, or immunotherapy; the exposure group received standard-of-care delivered RSM from 2021 to 2024, and historical controls were patients who received cancer treatment prior to RSM implementation from 2017 to 2021. Data were analyzed from May to October 2024. Exposure: RSM using electronic patient-reported outcomes. Main Outcomes and Measures: Health care utilization at 3 and 6 months after RSM enrollment (intensive care unit [ICU] admissions, hospitalizations, emergency department [ED] visits). Adjusted modified Poisson models estimated the relative risk (RR) and 95% CI of health care utilization overall. Penalized logistic regression was used for stratified analyses by patient race, residence, neighborhood deprivation, insurance type, and comorbid conditions. Results: A total of 5949 patients were assessed. From May 2021 to May 2024, 1392 patients (median [IQR] age at index date, 61 [51-69] years; 933 [67%] female) were enrolled in RSM, including 378 Black patients (27%) and 922 White patients (66%), with 262 patients (19%) living in rural areas and 372 patients (27%) living in areas with high neighborhood disadvantage; RSM patients were compared with 4557 controls (median [IQR] age at index date, 62 [53-69] years; 2654 [58%] female), including 1177 Black patients (26%) and 3151 White patients (69%), with 1012 patients (22%) living in rural areas, and 1281 patients (28%) living in areas with high neighborhood disadvantage. Compared with historical controls, hospitalizations among patients receiving RSM were 19% lower at 3 months (RR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.73-0.91) and 13% lower at 6 months (RR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.80-0.96). ICU admissions were not significantly different among the RSM populations compared with controls (3 months: RR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.59-1.13; 6 months: RR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.65-1.06). ED visits were similar for both groups (3 months: RR, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.89-1.16; 6 months: RR, 1.03; 95% CI, 0.92-1.15). Subset analyses showed similar patterns in 3- and 6-month RR for hospitalizations, ED visits, and ICU admissions. Conclusions and Relevance: In this nonrandomized controlled trial, RSM implementation was associated with reduced risk of hospitalizations for patients with cancer, supporting the need to expand implementation nationally.

Indexed as

NeoplasmsPatient Acceptance of Health CarePatient Reported Outcome MeasuresSymptom AssessmentAdultAgedAlabamaFemaleHospitalizationHumansMaleMiddle Aged

Identifiers

PMID40358948
PMCPMC12076171

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.