Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40205292›Full record

ArticleJournal of patient-reported outcomes2025

Expert consensus on implementing patient-reported outcomes in telehealth: findings from an international Delphi study.

Elizabeth J Unni, Liv Marit Valen Schougaard, Olalekan Lee Aiyegbusi, Kedar K V Mate, Elizabeth J Austin, Klara Greffin, Natasha Roberts, Birgith Engelst Grove, Holger Muehlan, ISOQOL Clinical practice SIG PROs in Telehealth Working Group

Abstract readConsensus Statement
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of patient-reported outcomes, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

10 authors.

Elizabeth J UnniTouro College of Pharmacy, New York, NY, USA.
Liv Marit Valen SchougaardAmbuFlex, Centre for Patient-reported Outcomes, Gødstrup Hospital, Herning, Denmark.
Olalekan Lee AiyegbusiCentre for Patient Reported Outcomes Research (CPROR), Department of Applied Health Sciences, College of Medicine and Health, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK.
Kedar K V MateFaculty of Medicine, McGill University, Montreal, Canada.
Elizabeth J AustinUniversity of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.
Klara GreffinDepartment of Health and Prevention, Institute of Psychology, University of Greifswald, Greifswald, Germany. Klara.Greffin@uni-greifswald.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0947-6091
Natasha RobertsSTARS Education and Research Alliance, Metro North Health, Herston, QLD, Australia.
Birgith Engelst GroveAmbuFlex, Centre for Patient-reported Outcomes, Gødstrup Hospital, Herning, Denmark.
Holger MuehlanDivision of Medical Psychology, Department of Medicine, Health & Medical University, Erfurt, Germany.
ISOQOL Clinical practice SIG PROs in Telehealth Working Group

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundUsing Patient Reported Outcomes (PROs) in clinical care can reduce healthcare service utilization by improving the quality of care. Telehealth, defined by WHO, as the use of "telecommunications and virtual technology to deliver healthcare outside of traditional healthcare facilities", can facilitate a dynamic dialogue between patients and healthcare providers for timely interventions. With the increased use of telehealth facilitated by the infrastructure development during the COVID-19 pandemic, there is an opportunity to utilize telehealth for PRO implementation and a need for guidelines for using PROs via telehealth. This study aimed to generate expert consensus on the utilization of PROs in telehealth.

methodsDelphi methodology was used to achieve consensus among international experts with a predetermined consensus threshold of 70%. Experts were mainly identified through the ISOQOL Clinical Practice SIG. Surveys asked a combination of structured and open-ended questions about the conceptualization of PROs in telehealth, its applicability, target population, implementation challenges and successful strategies, evaluation approaches, and the essential stakeholders. Data from each round were iteratively analyzed using descriptive statistics (quantitative data) and content analysis (qualitative data).

resultsOut of 24 invitations sent, 17 completed the first round, and 11 completed all three rounds. Respondents were equally distributed between clinicians and researchers and 70% had used PROs via telehealth before the pandemic. Consensus was achieved and some of the relevant aspects are monitoring patients for applicability; individuals with chronic diseases as the target population; resources, staff buy-in, and clinical workflow as the implementation challenges and strategies; utilization metrics for evaluation; and clinicians and patients as essential stakeholders. Though consensus was not reached for the conceptualization of PROs using telehealth, the modified FDA definition of telehealth with the addition of its purpose, and the mode of administration was the most acceptable version. See attached table.

conclusionThe expert consensus achieved provides important insights from an international perspective on how PROs are currently used via telehealth and the needed implementation support to advance their expansion in research and practice. Lack of consensus on the definition of PROs in telehealth signals the continued rapid evolution of their use and the need for additional research.

Indexed as

COVID-19Patient Reported Outcome MeasuresTelemedicineConsensusDelphi TechniqueHumansPandemicsSARS-CoV-2ApplicabilityConceptualizationDelphiExpert consensusImplementation challengesImplementation strategiesPatient reported outcome measuresPatient reported outcomesStakeholdersTarget populationTelehealth

Identifiers

PMID40205292
PMCPMC11981999

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.