Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36378513›Full record

ArticleJMIR human factors2022

Adapting a Patient-Reported Outcome Measure to Digital Outpatient Specialist Health Care Services for Type 1 Diabetes: User Involvement Study.

Heidi Holmen, Tone Singstad, Lis Ribu, Annesofie Lunde Jensen, Nina Mickelson Weldingh, Astrid Torbjørnsen

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR human factors, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 17% of its field
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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Observational
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
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

6 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Heidi HolmenDepartment of Nursing and Health Promotion, Oslo Metropolitan University, Oslo, Norway.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1314-7813
Tone SingstadEndocrinology Outpatient Service, Akershus University Hospital, Lørenskog, Norway.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2499-5826
Lis RibuCentre for Senior Citizen Staff, Oslo Metropolitan University, Oslo, Norway.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1850-7902
Annesofie Lunde JensenDepartment of Clinical Medicine, Faculty of Health, Aarhus University, Aarhus, Denmark.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2025-6663
Nina Mickelson WeldinghDepartment of Research Support Service, Akershus University Hospital, Lørenskog, Norway.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1965-4552
Astrid TorbjørnsenDepartment of Nursing and Health Promotion, Oslo Metropolitan University, Oslo, Norway.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2385-2452
Akershus University Hospital · NOOsloMet – Oslo Metropolitan University · NOAarhus University · DKOslo University Hospital · NO

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDiabetes self-management is crucial for patients with type 1 diabetes, and digital services can support their self-management and facilitate flexible follow-up. The potential of using digital patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures in routine outpatient care is not fully used owing to a lack of adapted PRO measures.

objectiveThis study presents the process of identifying and adapting a digital PRO measure for use in clinical diabetes practice and describes the preferred item topics of the adapted PRO measure, as reported by patients and diabetes specialist nurses.

methodsWith the involvement of patients, diabetes specialist nurses, management, and researchers, we hosted a series of workshops and 2 dialogue conferences. Scoping searches to identify relevant PRO measures formed the foundation for the process. An in-person dialogue conference was conducted with diabetes specialist nurses as participants, and a digital dialogue conference was conducted with patients with type 1 diabetes as participants. A diabetes-specific PRO measure was translated and adapted to our digital platform. Notes and summaries from the dialogue conferences were imported into NVivo (QSR International) and thematically analyzed as a single combined data set.

resultsThe thematic analysis of the 2 dialogue conferences aimed to explore the views of patients with type 1 diabetes and diabetes specialist nurses on the outcomes necessary to measure. An overarching theme, Ensuring that the PRO measure captures the patients' needs precisely and accurately, in a way that facilitates care and communication with health care personnel, was identified and supported with data from both the patients and diabetes specialist nurses. This theme contained four categories: The need for explanatory text after questions to ensure understanding and accurate response, Capturing individual needs in standardized questions, getting to the heart of the patient's problem, and The questions increase patient reflection.

conclusionsWe successfully conducted an iterative process that identified a PRO measure aligned with the topics raised by the diabetes specialist nurses. Similarly, the patients found the PRO measure to be relevant and one that was addressing their needs. Only minor adjustments were necessary when programming the PRO measure in the digital platform. Our management, patients, and diabetes specialist nurses had a valuable impact on the results. User involvement facilitated a specific focus on the clinical requests to be met by PRO measures and how they must be adapted to local and digital platforms. Overall, this has facilitated the current implementation of the adapted digital PRO measure.

Indexed as

digital interventionspatient-reported outcome measurestype 1 diabetesuser involvement

Identifiers

PMID36378513
PMCPMC9709667
OpenAlexW4309165322

What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.