Evidence mapPaperPMID 40407342Full record

SynthesisJournal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA2025

Electronic patient-reported outcome measures for triaging and scheduling outpatient appointments: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Chen He, Yuelin Xia, Ying Shan Cheung, Sze Tung Lam, Suephy C Chen, Jose M Valderas, Ellie Choi

Abstract readSystematic ReviewMeta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Factors associated with response to patient-reported outcome measures: a systematic review of systematic and scoping reviews, and meta-analyses.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2026
    Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Biomedical and health informatics Potpourri.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2025
    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

7 authors.

Chen HeDepartment of Medicine, National University Hospital, Singapore 119074, Singapore.ORCID 0000-0002-4113-0886
Yuelin XiaYong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore 117597, Singapore.ORCID 0009-0002-5449-5582
Ying Shan CheungDepartment of Medicine, National University Hospital, Singapore 119074, Singapore.
Sze Tung LamDepartment of Medicine, National University Hospital, Singapore 119074, Singapore.
Suephy C ChenDepartment of Dermatology, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham VA Medical Center, Durham, NC 27710, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-0678-7380
Jose M ValderasCentre for Research in Health Systems Performance (CRiHSP), Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore 117549, Singapore.ORCID 0000-0002-9299-1555
Ellie ChoiYong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore 117597, Singapore.ORCID 0000-0002-2059-3478

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesThis study aims to review the effectiveness of electronic patient-reported outcome measures (ePROMs) to triage and schedule appointments for adult patients with chronic medical conditions. MATERIALS AND

methodsA structured search was implemented in electronic databases for randomized controlled trials that compared use of ePROMs to facilitate flexible scheduling of appointments (intervention) with conventional scheduling practices (control) in adult outpatients with chronic medical condition. The primary outcome was the difference in healthcare utilization, measured by the number of outpatient physical appointments. Secondary outcomes include disease control and implementational outcomes. A meta-analysis using random effects modeling was performed.

resultsThe search strategy yielded 3769 citations and 1 additional article from hand search; 17 randomized controlled trials (6469 patients) were included. Most studies focused on cancer (n = 9) or rheumatoid arthritis (n = 3). Six out of 10 studies comparing the number of physical appointments showed that ePROMs significantly reduced the mean number of physical appointments, while 1 study reported increased appointments. A meta-analysis of 6 studies with sufficient data for pooling indicated that the ePROMs group had fewer appointments, with a mean difference of -1.12 (CI, -1.87 to -0.37). Among 10 studies evaluating disease control, 2 showed improved disease control with ePROMs, 2 reported improved survival in cancer patients, while 6 found no significant differences. DISCUSSION: Current evidence supports the feasibility and acceptability of incorporating ePROMs in outpatient visit scheduling, with a reduction in physical appointments without compromising disease outcomes.

conclusionePROMs can be used to support and guide decisions regarding outpatient appointment scheduling.

Indexed as

Ambulatory CareAppointments and SchedulesPatient Reported Outcome MeasuresTriageChronic DiseaseHumansRandomized Controlled Trials as Topiceffectiveness of careoutpatient carepatient-reported outcomesquality improvementtriaging and scheduling

Identifiers

PMID40407342
PMCPMC12202323

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
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.