ArticleSocial science & medicine (1982)2026
From reporting to relating: Reimagining ePROMs in cancer symptom management.
Article in Social science & medicine (1982), 2026. 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.
- Symptom management in cancer care: An evolutionary concept analysis for a digitally enabled collaborative framework.Asia-Pacific journal of oncology nursing · 2026Review
- "A lot of the times, patients really don't know what questions to ask:" Communication perspectives of Black patients with advanced lung cancer.Patient education and counseling · 2026Article
- Measurement of the impact of giant cell arteritis and treatment with glucocorticoids on health-related quality of life.Therapeutic advances in musculoskeletal disease · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Electronic Patient-Reported Outcome Measures (ePROMs) are digital tools that allow patients to report symptoms using computers, tablets, or smartphones. In cancer care, ePROMs are increasingly used to monitor SPPADE symptoms: sleep disturbance, pain, physical function decline, anxiety, depression, and energy deficit or fatigue. While ePROMs can support timely symptom recognition and clinical response, their influence on how patients and clinicians connect and understand one another during care remains notably underexplored. This study investigates how the integration of digital symptom reporting into clinical routines may shape both the content of symptom reporting and the relational dynamics between patients and providers. We conducted 46 in-depth interviews with cancer patients enrolled in a multi-year symptom management trial (E2C2) at Mayo Clinic. Using a combination of deductive frame analysis and inductive analysis informed by Boundary Object Theory, we first examined how patients with advanced cancer understood and approached the sharing of SPPADE symptoms. We then explored how ePROM technology shaped their experiences and perceptions of symptom reporting. We found that three interrelated factors shaped patient engagement with ePROMs: (1) personal orientations toward perceiving and expressing symptoms, (2) coping styles, including tensions between appropriate self-monitoring and positive self-presentation, and (3) expectations shaped by prior interactions with the care team. While ePROMs helped patients articulate symptoms, they also raised questions about whether responses were reviewed and how they were interpreted by clinicians. Patients described ePROMs as signaling what kinds of symptoms "counted" to providers, subtly reshaping their understanding of illness and their role in managing it. Our findings engage and extend Boundary Object Theory by showing that ePROMs function not only as tools for coordinating information, but also as relational artifacts. Attending to their interpretive and emotional effects highlights new opportunities to design systems that support connection and shared understanding, alongside efficient data flow.
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.