ArticleJournal of public health (Berlin, Germany)2025
Integration of Patient Reported Outcomes Data among People with HIV in Washington, DC: A sub-cohort of the DC Cohort Longitudinal Study.
Article in Journal of public health (Berlin, Germany), 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Aim: Patient reported outcomes (PROs) can help to evaluate gaps and areas for improvement along the HIV care continuum. We sought to describe the methodology and processes of a PROs study within the DC Cohort study population, describe the PROs results to date, report on lessons learned, and describe future directions of the research. Subject and Methods: Each study site recruited participants from the DC Cohort, a longitudinal study on people with HIV, to complete the electronic PROs baseline and annual follow-up surveys, which consisted of previously validated measures of social determinants of health, mental health, substance use, medication adherence, and other related measures. The recruitment, enrollment, and data linkage process strengths and limitations were described. Participants' PROs survey responses were linked to their DC Cohort data to better understand participant's health overall. Results: There have been 1,739 baseline, 610 first annual, and 142 second annual completed surveys between May 2021 and May 2024. Among PROs participants, the most common reported unmet need was food insecurity (33.5%) and the most common mental health condition was generalized anxiety disorder (39.5%). A majority (59.7%) of participants reported being sexually active, but at least half did not use barrier protection. Conclusion: PROs surveys complement electronic health record data collected in the DC Cohort study, allowing for examination of health outcomes and factors collected in a longitudinal manner. PROs results could be integrated into near-real time dashboards for use by clinicians and incorporated into routine clinical care to provide a more holistic understanding of the patient.
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.