Trial reportJournal of patient-reported outcomes2026
Providers' perspectives on implementing alert-based patient-reported outcome monitoring for stage IV breast cancer.
Trial report 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesUsing digital patient monitoring with patient-reported outcomes (PROs) is increasing. However, these new digital care tools have not yet been adequately implemented in routine cancer care. To address this issue, we conducted a process evaluation to accompany the PRO B study, a multicenter randomized and controlled trial across Germany, which examined the impact of alert-based PRO monitoring in stage IV breast cancer patients. This article presents the results of this process evaluation from the perspective of participating health-care providers, focusing on determinants for successful implementation.
methodsSemi-structured interviews with 15 interviewees from 12 certified breast cancer centers across Germany participating in the PRO B study were conducted. Interviews were structured by content analysis using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR).
resultsKey findings include the pivotal role of study nurses in managing the PRO monitoring system and its alerts, engaging patients, and ensuring continuity of care, alongside the providers' generally favorable views of the intervention. However, challenges such as limited digital infrastructure and the need for integration into existing hospital information systems were noted.
conclusionsThe study highlights the crucial role of nurses, existing infrastructure, and streamlined processes for integrating PRO monitoring into routine clinical practice. Providers' experiences with the intervention highlighted the need for workflow adjustments and additional training for effective implementation in routine cancer care. Tailored solutions, including integration into existing digital patient record systems and processes, as well as resource allocation, are essential for the successful adoption of PRO monitoring in a health-care system.
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.