ArticleClinical medicine (London, England)2026
A FeAsibility items Checklist for assessing implementation characTeristics of patient-reported Outcome measures in Research, Regulation and Routine clinical care (FACTOR3): Development and evaluation.
Article in Clinical medicine (London, England), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Cardiovascular disease: everybody's business.Clinical medicine (London, England) · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
19 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
STUDY
objectivePatient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) provide valuable data to inform regulatory decision making, health technology assessment and routine clinical care. We aimed to develop a feasibility item checklist for PROMs and their selection, beyond their psychometric properties (FACTOR3).
methodsWe followed a five-stage method to select parameters for PROM evaluation. 1) A scoping literature review identified candidate items for consideration; 2) round 1 modified Delphi was used to select items for inclusion or exclusion, conducted by the design group (n = 14); 3) feedback on the checklist was provided by representatives from the European Medicines Agency and National Institute for Health and Care Excellence; 4) round 2 modified Delphi was used to finalise item selection, conducted by the clinical domains group (n = 21) and 5) evaluation of the feasibility item checklist using a selection of PROMS (EQ5D-5L, HeartQOL, the Oxford Hip Score, The EORTC Core Questionnaire QLQ-C30, Re-QOL-10 and NEI-VFQ-25) (Fig. 1).
resultsThe scoping review identified 13 items relating to the intrinsic feasibility of using PROMs which were considered in the modified Delphi. The final FACTOR3 checklist included eight unique candidate items: price; licensing, comprehensibility, duration, coverage, translations, electronic device compatibility; and minimal important difference. Of the six PROMS evaluated, the intraclass correlation coefficient was 0.81, suggesting good reliability.
conclusionsFACTOR3 is a feasibility item checklist to assess the implementation characteristics of PROMs in research, regulation and routine clinical care. It may be used in conjunction with existing psychometric evaluation and user guides for PROMS to facilitate their use in health 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.