ArticleJMIR formative research2025
Determinants of Dropping Out of Remote Patient-Reported Outcome-Based Follow-Up Among Patients With Epilepsy: Prospective Cohort Study.
Article in JMIR formative research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- A generic and adaptable model of developing, implementing, and maintaining patient-reported outcomes in clinical practice - the AmbuFlex model.Journal of patient-reported outcomes · 2026Article
- Inclusive approaches to research and healthcare for nitrous oxide users: lessons from a longitudinal study.BMJ neurology open · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The use of patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures is an emerging field in health care. In the Central Denmark Region, epilepsy outpatients can participate in remote PRO-based follow-up by completing a questionnaire at home instead of attending a traditional outpatient appointment. This approach aims to encourage patient engagement and is used in approximately half of all epilepsy outpatient consultations. However, dropout in this type of follow-up is a challenging issue. Objective: This study aimed to examine the association between potential self-reported determinants and dropout in remote PRO-based follow-up for patients with epilepsy. Methods: This prospective cohort study (n=2282) explored the association between dropout in remote PRO-based follow-up for patients with epilepsy and 9 potential determinants covering 3 domains: health-related self-management, general and mental health status, and patient satisfaction. The associations were examined using multiple logistic regression analyses with adjustment for sex, age, education, and cohabitation. Results: A total of 770 patients (33.7%) dropped out of remote PRO-based follow-up over 5 years. Statistically significant associations were identified between all potential determinants and dropouts in PRO-based follow-up. Patients with low social support had an odds ratio of 2.20 (95% CI 1.38-3.50) for dropout. Patients with poor health ratings had an odds ratio of 2.17 (95% CI 1.65-2.85) for dropout. Similar estimates were identified for the remaining determinants in question. Conclusions: Patients with reduced self-management, poor health status, and low patient satisfaction had higher odds of dropout in remote PRO-based follow-up. However, further research is needed to determine the reasons for dropout.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.