ArticleBMC nursing2025
Nurses' perspectives on the implementation of patient-reported outcomes: a descriptive qualitative study.
Article in BMC nursing, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Cultural adaptation of evidence-based prevention programs for substance use and mental health issues in adolescents: a qualitative secondary analysis of barriers and facilitators.Translational behavioral medicine · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPatient-reported outcomes (PROs) are crucial for understanding patient needs and improving patient-centred care. Nurses are key facilitators in PROs implementation, offering valuable insights. However, their perspectives and challenges remain underexplored. This study aims to investigate nurses’ perceptions, barriers, and support needs in implementing PROs.
methodsA descriptive qualitative study was conducted, using semi-structured interviews with 17 nurses from a tertiary public hospital in China. Data were analysed using thematic analysis, with post-hoc mapping of emergent themes to the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). The study adhered to the Consolidated Criteria for Reporting Qualitative Research (COREQ) checklist for thorough reporting.
resultsThree main themes were identified: (1) Reframing the value of patient-centred care through PROs, including enhancing the quality of nurse–patient communication and advancing the professionalisation of nursing practice; (2) Structural barriers to the implementation of PROs, encompassing the cognitive–practical competency gap and the lack of organisational support mechanisms; and (3) Innovation needs and pathways for a digitally enabled, PROs-oriented transformation in nursing, covering institutional pathways for implementation and facilitating integrative innovation through intelligent technologies. CFIR mapping highlighted how individual knowledge and beliefs, organisational culture, and intervention adaptability shaped both facilitators and barriers.
conclusionsThis study demonstrates that while nurses generally have positive attitudes towards the integration of PROs and acknowledge its potential to enhance communication, care quality, and professional practice, significant multi-level barriers remain. Addressing these challenges requires department-wide training, strong leadership, clear policies, and investment in adaptable digital infrastructure. These system-level strategies can empower nurses to use PROs confidently and consistently, thereby supporting the institutionalisation of patient-centred care in China and similar healthcare contexts. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: Not applicable.
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.