ArticleJournal of patient-reported outcomes2025
Stakeholders' perspectives on implementing and integrating patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in health systems - insights from Alberta, Canada.
Article in Journal of patient-reported outcomes, 2025. 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.
- Artificial Intelligence for Identifying Patient-Reported Outcome and Experience Measures in Oncology: Retrospective Cross-Sectional Study Using ClinicalTrials.gov.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Patients as partners in a research advisory council role: describing the APERSU Patient Engagement Network.Journal of patient-reported outcomes · 2026Article
- Nurses' perspectives on the implementation of patient-reported outcomes: a descriptive qualitative study.BMC nursing · 2025Article
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
backgroundPatient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are valuable tools for evaluating outcomes of healthcare interventions and have been increasingly used in health systems around the world. While PROMs adoption has grown globally, variations exist in their use across the health system. This stakeholder engagement and consultation activity aims to understand factors impacting PROMs adoption, implementation, and utilization, and identify strategies for enhancing utilization of PROMs data within the healthcare system in Alberta, Canada. METHODOLOGY: Key stakeholders from various roles were interviewed, including PROMs programs, health system improvement, data analytics, clinical practice, evaluation, health economics, and research, from diverse clinical areas, including cancer, primary care, epilepsy, rehabilitation, arthroplasty, cardiovascular surgery, and rheumatology. Interviews were recorded, transcribed and analyzed using thematic analysis. Results were synthesized using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) and Diffusion of Innovation Framework (DOI).
resultsA total of 25 interviews, lasting between 45 and 60 minutes, were completed. Factors impacting the adoption, implementation and utilization of PROMs within the Alberta healthcare system included: (1) Intervention characteristics: shared understanding of PROMs, challenges in capturing relevant patient outcomes, standardization and integration of PROMs, modalities of data collection, making PROMs actionable at the patient-clinician level, and interpreting PROMs data; (2) Inner setting: Cultural shift towards patient-centered care, change management and clinician mindset, organizational commitment and support, integration into broader measurement frameworks, access to PROMs data, potential for replication and adaptation, and importance of incentives and requirements; (3) Outer setting: Resource constraints, policy and systemic challenges, focus on value-based care, and responsible use of PROMs data; (4) Characteristics of individuals: Expertise and understanding of PROMs, and stakeholder engagement and education; and (5) Process: Balancing bottom-up and top-down approaches, workflow integration, patient engagement, and continuous evaluation and quality improvement.
conclusionsThe study highlights factors influencing PROMs adoption in Alberta, including the need for a unified understanding, workflow integration, and electronic data use. Key strategies involve fostering patient-centered care, ensuring organizational support, addressing resource and policy issues, and providing targeted education. Engaging early adopters and offering incentives can improve PROMs integration and patient outcomes.
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.