Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39486014›Full record

ArticleJCO clinical cancer informatics2024

Use of Patient-Reported Outcomes in Risk Prediction Model Development to Support Cancer Care Delivery: A Scoping Review.

Roshan Paudel, Samira Dias, Carrie G Wade, Christine Cronin, Michael J Hassett

Registry-linked trialAbstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in JCO clinical cancer informatics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03850912 (SIMPRO Research Center), which is not on this map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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.

NCT03850912 nacompletednot on this map

SIMPRO Research Center: Integration and Implementation of PROs for Symptom Management in Oncology Practice

TypeinterventionalSponsorDana-Farber Cancer InstituteRan2019 to 2025Enrolled42,808ConditionsOther Cancer, Gastrointestinal Cancer, Thoracic Cancer, Gynecologic CancerArmsStakeholder Survey (Control Period), Stakeholder Survey (Intervention Period), Qualitative Interview, SASS Questionnaire, eSyM
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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.

Roshan PaudelDana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA.ORCID 0000-0002-8584-7045
Samira DiasDana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA.ORCID 0009-0009-4054-7178
Carrie G WadeHarvard Medical School, Boston, MA.
Christine CroninDana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA.ORCID 0000-0002-5474-0923
Michael J HassettDana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA.ORCID 0000-0003-0754-3510

Funding

SIMPRO Research Center: Integration and Implementation of PROs for Symptom Management in Oncology PracticeUM1CA233080 · NCI · DANA-FARBER CANCER INST · PI HASSETT, MICHAEL JAMES, OSAROGIAGBON, RAYMOND U · 2018 to 2023
$9.1M
NCI NIH HHS UM1 CA233080
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe integration of patient-reported outcomes (PROs) into electronic health records (EHRs) has enabled systematic collection of symptom data to manage post-treatment symptoms. The use and integration of PRO data into routine care are associated with overall treatment success, adherence, and satisfaction. Clinical trials have demonstrated the prognostic value of PROs including physical function and global health status in predicting survival. It is unknown to what extent routinely collected PRO data are used in the development of risk prediction models (RPMs) in oncology care. The objective of the scoping review is to assess how PROs are used to train risk RPMs to predict patient outcomes in oncology care.

methodsUsing the scoping review methodology outlined in the Joanna Briggs Institute Manual for Evidence Synthesis, we searched four databases (MEDLINE, CINAHL, Embase, and Web of Science) to locate peer-reviewed oncology articles that used PROs as predictors to train models. Study characteristics including settings, clinical outcomes, and model training, testing, validation, and performance data were extracted for analyses.

resultsOf the 1,254 studies identified, 18 met inclusion criteria. Most studies performed retrospective analyses of prospectively collected PRO data to build prediction models. Post-treatment survival was the most common outcome predicted. Discriminative performance of models trained using PROs was better than models trained without PROs. Most studies did not report model calibration.

conclusionSystematic collection of PROs in routine practice provides an opportunity to use patient-reported data to develop RPMs. Model performance improves when PROs are used in combination with other comprehensive data sources.

Indexed as

NeoplasmsPatient Reported Outcome MeasuresDelivery of Health CareElectronic Health RecordsHumansMedical OncologyPrognosisRisk Assessment

Identifiers

PMID39486014
PMCPMC11534280

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

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 Socratic graph.