ArticleJournal of patient-reported outcomes2025
KERMIT: Performance indicators in electronic patient reported outcome measures: a modified Delphi.
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 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Establishing Consensus on the Breakthrough Pain Assessment Questionnaire-Self Report (BTPAQ-SR) for Typically Developing Children and Young People (8-25 yrs) with Life-Limiting and Life-Threatening Conditions: An International e-Delphi Study of Expert Healthcare Professionals.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe use of electronic patient reported outcome measures (ePROMs) is increasing in routine cancer care, with benefit demonstrated in improving patient survival, satisfaction and response time. ePROMs represent a complex intervention, with successful implementation reliant upon a range of questionnaires, platform, patient and clinician characteristics alongside the wider organisational readiness and environment. Key performance indicators (KPIs) assess the performance of a system. A KPI framework would offer value in assessing ePROM implementation projects, however the outcomes and indicators of importance are not clear.
methodA modified Delphi methodology was used to define a framework of KPIs for assessing the deployment of ePROMs in routine cancer care. Potential KPIs were identified through literature searches, de-duplicated and allocated to a matrix of domains. Delphi participants were identified through a literature review and study team networks. KPIs were presented to participants for prioritisation using an online platform. A final set of KPIs was identified through two rounds of consensus with participants rating each KPI for relevance.
resultsThe literature search generated a list of 196 potential KPIs of which 48 were considered by 15 experts in the Delphi process. Consensus was reached to include 12 KPIs in the first round and a further 2 KPIs in the second round. Participant's open text responses were analysed, suggesting a number of areas of debate regarding which KPIs are most pertinent. DISCUSSION: This work provides a framework of 14 KPIs, covering those of relevance to patients, clinicians and health services and recognising the acceptability, feasibility and impact of ePROMs. This framework offers a means to appraise the implementation of ePROMs, supporting teams as they implement ePROMs in routine cancer care and other healthcare settings.
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.