ArticleJournal of oncology pharmacy practice : official publication of the International Society of Oncology Pharmacy Practitioners2025
Pharmacist-led interventions associated with symptoms identified by electronic patient-reported outcome battery: A descriptive study.
Article in Journal of oncology pharmacy practice : official publication of the International Society of Oncology Pharmacy Practitioners, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Abstract
IntroductionAt the University of California Irvine (UCI) in Orange County California, we published an implementation study to evaluate the use of an electronic patient-reported outcome (ePRO) tool to guide pharmacist-led chemotherapy education in newly diagnosed cancer patients. The goal of this secondary analysis was to describe the types of pharmacist-led interventions performed in the implementation study.MethodsUsing a pre-configured ePRO battery, patients' symptoms were assessed in seven domains (cognitive impairment, physical impairment, pain, depression, anxiety, fatigue, nausea/vomiting) at each infusion visit. Other symptoms that were brought up during the visit were also documented. Based on symptom scores calculated in real-time, pharmacists implemented personalized patient care strategies and documented them in the clinical notes. Descriptive statistics were employed to evaluate the type of interventions employed for each symptom domain.ResultsAmong 250 patients enrolled, the average age of participants was 60 years old (SD = 14.6), with 129 (52%) being female, and 134 (54%) of participants identified as white. The preconfigured ePRO battery identified clinically important symptoms at 47.3% of the visits, and other clinically important symptoms were identified at 23.4% of the visits. Pharmacist education was performed for 311 (55%) of 564 visits examined throughout the study. The highest proportions of pharmacological interventions were performed to manage nausea/vomiting (51 visits), followed by gastrointestinal symptoms (21 visits), and pain (16 visits). Additional provider communication was performed for managing nausea/vomiting (14 visits), pain (9 visits), and neurological symptoms (9 visits).ConclusionWe observed a high rate of pharmacist-led education after the institution of ePRO to evaluate symptoms in patients undergoing anticancer treatment. Future studies should consider incorporating additional ePRO domains to include a wide range of patient-reported symptoms tailored to each type of anticancer treatment.
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.