ArticleThe patient2026
ePROMs are Best Used Alongside 'A High-Quality Conversation' as Part of a Therapeutic Relationship. A Qualitative Study of Children with Life-Altering Skin Conditions.
Article in The patient, 2026. 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeThe benefits and barriers of using patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in routine clinical practice have been examined extensively, but there has been limited in-depth exploration of the experience of PROMs by stakeholders and consumers. This study sought to understand the experiences of children with life-altering skin conditions, their caregivers and treating health professionals regarding the routine use of electronic PROMs.
methodsUsing interpretive description, data were gathered through qualitative interviews and researcher observations in two outpatient clinics within a major metropolitan paediatric hospital. In total, 48 interviews were conducted with children (aged 11-16 years) attending burn scar or vascular anomalies clinics, their caregivers (children of all ages) and treating health professionals.
resultsThe therapeutic relationship was a central organising concept and crucial for providing person-centred care. Within the therapeutic relationship, ePROMs were used to prioritise where to start alongside a high-quality conversation. Study themes identified were shaping (or not shaping) care, taking a considered approach to the use of ePROMs, and aligning values and priorities with the everyday reality. ePROMs did not shape care or capture the priorities of all children and caregivers. A spectrum of sentiment from negative to positive was expressed by families regarding the routine use of ePROMs, differing to the predominantly positive sentiment by health professionals.
conclusionsePROMs should be used alongside high-quality conversations to assist in eliciting, understanding and evaluating what matters to children and caregivers but must be used within a therapeutic relationship.
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.