Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41733986›Full record

ArticleJournal of medical Internet research2026

Quality of Life Trajectories With Integration Into Electronic Health Records for High-Resolution Patient Outcomes: Algorithm Development and Validation Study.

Martin Dugas, Robin Fleige, Max Christian Blumenstock, Stephan Christoph Feder, Tobias Dittrich, Niels Siegel, Celine Fabienne Bergmann, Luis Wettach, Sandra Sauer, Pavlina Lenga and 9 more

Abstract readValidation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of medical Internet research, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

19 authors.

Martin DugasInstitute of Medical Informatics, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9740-0788
Robin FleigeInstitute of Medical Informatics, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0009-3492-8046
Max Christian BlumenstockInstitute of Medical Informatics, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9816-0445
Stephan Christoph FederInstitute of Medical Informatics, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0004-7040-9706
Tobias DittrichInstitute of Medical Informatics, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6442-8255
Niels SiegelDepartment of General, Visceral and Transplantation Surgery, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0007-9702-5982
Celine Fabienne BergmannInstitute of Medical Informatics, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0006-7269-3573
Luis WettachInstitute of Medical Informatics, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0005-0424-5392
Sandra SauerDepartment of Hematology, Oncology and Rheumatology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5552-3149
Pavlina LengaInstitute of Medical Informatics, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3842-0783
Sandro M KriegDepartment of Neurosurgery, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4050-1531
Susanne Dugas-BreitNational Center for Tumor Diseases, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1339-6353
Lucy Joanne KesslerDepartment of Ophthalmology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5322-9875
Kosima KosmallaInstitute of Medical Informatics, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0003-3267-742X
Fleur Fritz-KebedeInstitute of Medical Informatics, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9005-6766
Martin LoosDepartment of General, Visceral and Transplantation Surgery, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1612-7017
Hans-Christoph FriederichDepartment of General Internal Medicine, Psychosomatics and Psychotherapy, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4344-8959
Thomas M PauschInstitute of Medical Informatics, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6145-3263
Matthias GanzingerInstitute of Medical Informatics, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2716-5425

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPatient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) such as health-related quality of life (HRQoL) are usually assessed at greater time intervals such as diagnostic time points, after treatment, and during follow-up. Many PROMs require frequent data collection (weekly or daily). Electronic PROMs enable high-resolution tracking but face declining response rates. Integrating PROMs into electronic health records (EHRs) could improve response rates and personalize therapy.

objectiveThis study aimed to evaluate the technical and clinical feasibility of high-frequency HRQoL assessments for routine care in EHRs.

methodsPatients receive emails on their mobile devices with 1-time links to a web-based app called MyEDC. This app communicates with an electronic data capture proxy in the demilitarized zone of the hospital. With a polling mechanism, these patient data are transferred to the protected hospital network and uploaded to the EHR system. HRQoL on a visual analog scale is assessed over the course of treatment in 4 clinical use cases: psychosomatics, hematology, visceral surgery, and neurosurgery.

resultsQuality of life (QoL) trajectories were collected for 110 patients with daily or weekly data collection between 2 weeks and 3 months. The HRQoL analyses revealed clinically relevant findings across the 4 different medical domains. In the use case psychosomatics, 36 patients showed a significant increase in HRQoL following 4 weeks of therapy, rising from a median of 42% (IQR 32%-52%) to 60% (IQR 41%-67%; P=.01). An analysis of 25 patients in hematology demonstrated a significant correlation between HRQoL and 30-item QoL Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30) global health status score (P=.02). For 26 patients in visceral surgery, a significant association was observed between HRQoL and the reported pain level (P<.001). The clinical feasibility was further highlighted in the neurosurgery use case, where 23 patients showed a median response time to the electronic PROM questionnaires of 5.3 (IQR 0.6-17.7) hours. HRQoL values were associated with disease-specific symptoms and scores, indicating clinical validity of this readout. Considerable variability of HRQoL was observed over time, both intraindividually and interindividually. Median area under the curve of HRQoL ranged from 0.46 to 0.79. Median time to answer ranged from 0.9 to 7.1 hours. No significant association between number of responses and age was observed.

conclusionsHigh-resolution QoL trajectories with EHR integration are technically and clinically feasible. They offer a novel readout beyond survival analysis or PROM end point, enabling precise disease characterization and treatment comparison.

Indexed as

AlgorithmsElectronic Health RecordsPatient Reported Outcome MeasuresQuality of LifeAgedDigital HealthFemaleHumansMaleMiddle Agedelectronic health recordsfeasibility studymobile devicespatient-reported outcome measuresquality of life

Identifiers

PMID41733986
PMCPMC12976594

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.