Evidence mapPaperPMID 36715728Full record

ArticleRheumatology international2023

Predictors for response to electronic patient-reported outcomes in routine care in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: a retrospective cohort study.

Jimmy Wiegel, Bart F Seppen, Michael T Nurmohamed, Marieke M Ter Wee, Wouter H Bos

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Rheumatology international, 2023. 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
field-weighted citation impact
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.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  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

5 authors.

Jimmy WiegelAmsterdam Rheumatology & Immunology Center, Reade, Admiraal Helfrichstraat 1, 1056 AA, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. j.wiegel@reade.nl.ORCID 0000-0001-9073-7388
Bart F SeppenAmsterdam Rheumatology & Immunology Center, Reade, Admiraal Helfrichstraat 1, 1056 AA, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-0421-0553
Michael T NurmohamedAmsterdam Rheumatology & Immunology Center, Reade, Admiraal Helfrichstraat 1, 1056 AA, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-6274-1934
Marieke M Ter WeeAmsterdam UMC Location Vrije Universiteit, Department of Epidemiology & Data Science, Boelelaan 1117, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0003-3670-4256
Wouter H BosAmsterdam Rheumatology & Immunology Center, Reade, Admiraal Helfrichstraat 1, 1056 AA, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0003-3720-793X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Routine collection of electronic patient-reported outcomes (ePROs) can improve clinical care. However, a low response rate may counteract the benefits. To optimize adoption, the aim of this study was to investigate which patient factors and/or timing of the invitation predicted response to ePROs sent prior to consultations in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. We performed a retrospective database study with clinical data collected as part of usual care from the electronic medical records at Reade Amsterdam. The dataset comprised the email invitations to complete the ePRO sent prior to consultation. Multiple patient factors and factors defining the timing of the invitation were investigated if they predicted response to the ePRO through a multivariable logistic generalized estimating equation analysis. In total, 17.070 ePRO invitations were sent to 3194 patients (mean age 60 (SD 14), 74% female), of which 40% was completed. Patients between 55 and 73 years (OR 1.39, 95%CI 1.09-1.77) and with higher social economic status (SES) (OR 1.51, 95%CI 1.22-1.88) had significantly higher odds for completing the ePRO, while patients living in an urban area had lower odds (OR 0.69, 95% CI 0.62-0.76). In year 4 after implementation, the OR was increased to 3.69 (95% CI 2.91-4.90). The implementation of ePROs in daily clinical practice needs improvement since 40% of the ePROs sent prior to consultations were completed. Patients that had higher odds to report the next ePRO were between the age of 55-73, had a higher socio-economic status, and were residents in a rural area. The adoption of reporting the PRO increased over time, but the timing of the prompt did not predict response. Additional research is needed to understand ePRO completion, especially for patients with lower socio-economic status.

Indexed as

Arthritis, RheumatoidPatient Reported Outcome MeasuresElectronic Health RecordsElectronicsFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedRetrospective StudiesAdherenceeHealthElectronic patient reported outcomesePROsRheumatoid arthritisTelehealth

Identifiers

PMID36715728
PMCPMC9885920

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.