ArticleMultiple sclerosis journal - experimental, translational and clinical
Insights from a Danish nationwide implementation of patient-reported outcomes in multiple sclerosis.
Article in Multiple sclerosis journal - experimental, translational and clinical. 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
21 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Multiple sclerosis (MS) monitoring often relies on traditional methods like the expanded disability status scale (EDSS) and magnetic resonance imaging, which may not fully reflect patients' health. Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) provide valuable insights into patients' experiences of their disease. Objectives: This study evaluated the Danish implementation of PROs for people with MS (PwMS) 3 years post-launch, comparing clinical and demographic characteristics between PRO users and non-users, and assessing PRO adherence. Results: As of 1 January 2025, 2121 PwMS had signed up for PRO, compared to 14,125 who did not. PRO users were younger (mean age 50.6 vs. 53.2 years), more frequently female (73.6% vs. 68.0%), had a shorter disease duration (15.1 vs. 16.4 years), and were more likely to be on high-efficacy disease-modifying therapies (75.6% vs. 62.2%). Additionally, fewer PRO users had low EDSS scores (<3, 53.7% vs. 56.1%) and high scores (>6, 16.5% vs. 18.9%). Most enrolled patients lived in Region Hovedstaden (75.1%). Conclusion: The study highlights differences in profile between PRO users and non-users, demonstrating the PRO platform's adaptability across different ages and disability levels in PwMS. However, these findings also highlight potential implementation challenges and emphasize the need for sustained commitment to support long-term use of PRO.
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.