ArticleBMJ open quality2025
Understanding physicians' views on patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in lung cancer care: a qualitative approach.
Article in BMJ open quality, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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 increasingly recognised as valuable tools for personalising care pathways and improving the quality of life for patients with lung cancer. PROMs capture patients' perceptions of symptoms and functional status, while patient-reported experience measures focus on how patients perceive the care process, communication, empathy and accessibility. However, integrating PROMs into clinical practice remains challenging. This study explores physicians' perceptions of PROMs in lung cancer care, their impact and the barriers and facilitators to their implementation.
objectivesThis study seeks to understand physicians' perspectives on the role of PROMs in enhancing the quality of life, dignity and autonomy of patients with lung cancer and to identify key barriers and facilitators to their integration into clinical practice.
methods16 semistructured interviews were conducted with physicians treating patients with lung cancer. A hybrid thematic analysis was used to identify key themes and patterns in the data.
resultsThree main themes emerged: (1) patient-related factors, such as health literacy and emotional distress; (2) the influence of social and family environments and (3) the role of PROMs in clinical decision-making. While PROMs were valued for their potential to improve care, barriers like digital literacy and socioeconomic factors hindered their application. Specifically, the study found that while physicians valued the potential of PROMs to improve patient care, several barriers, including patients' digital literacy and socioeconomic factors, hindered their practical application.
conclusionsPROMs offer a pathway to enhance patient-centred care in lung cancer treatment. However, their successful integration requires addressing barriers such as health literacy, digital access and multidisciplinary collaboration. Future research should focus on strategies for effective PROM integration into clinical workflows and investigate methods for effectively integrating PROMs into routine clinical workflows.
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.