ArticleJournal of patient-reported outcomes2026
Accessible data collection methods in clinical trials: do current best practices for the implementation of electronic patient-reported outcome measures (ePROMs) meet accessibility standards?
Article in Journal of patient-reported outcomes, 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Apps and web browsers, whether on smartphones, tablets or laptops, have become the mainstream methods of capturing clinical outcome assessment (COA) data, and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in particular, in clinical trials. There has long been concern around whether implementing traditionally paper-based questionnaires on electronic systems may impact the measurement properties of these carefully validated questionnaires, with migration best practices focusing predominately on this issue. In parallel, app and web-design best practices outside of clinical research have focused on the accessibility and usability of these electronic systems for the widest range of users. This article evaluates how existing web accessibility success criteria compare to electronic PROM (ePROM) design best practices, identifying where there is alignment or tension, where further evidence is needed to ensure both accessibility and the maintenance of the questionnaire measurement properties, and what accessibility practices can be incorporated into ePROM design best practices today.
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.