SynthesisBMC infectious diseases2026
Raising the patient's voice in influenza research and care: a systematic review of patient-reported outcomes.
Synthesis in BMC infectious diseases, 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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPatient-reported outcomes (PROs) enable the evaluation of patients’ perspectives in relation to their health and well-being. This paper reviews PRO instruments, regulatory guidelines, and product labels for influenza and influenza-like illness (ILI) to recommend strategies for their optimal use in clinical research.
methodsWe conducted a systematic literature review of publications and electronic records reporting PROs for influenza and influenza-like illness.
resultsThe systematic search identified 112 items, of which 36 were included in the final analysis (20 clinical research publications; two national guidelines; eight influenza intervention product labels; and six PRO instrument descriptions). We identified influenza-specific PRO instruments developed to assess symptom severity and impact of influenza, or the acceptability and safety of influenza interventions; several of these have been used in clinical research, enabling a better understanding of the impact of influenza and influenza interventions. However, further research on the use of influenza-specific PROs in routine care settings is needed.
conclusionsBased on these findings, we describe opportunities and challenges for PROs and propose recommendations to facilitate wider implementation of PROs in influenza research and patient care.
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.