Improving Adherence to electronic Patient-Reported Outcomes: Study Protocol for a Systematic Literature Review and subsequent qualitative Interviews
Mukowski, R.; Otto, L.; Rogge, A.
Show abstract
BackgroundElectronic patient-reported outcomes (ePROs) are frequently used to include the patients perspective in clinical trials and routine clinical care. In contrast to data collected in clinical trials, PRO response rates tend to decrease drastically overtime in routine clinical care, leading to missing data and questionable validity of results reported. This study aims to investigate factors influencing patient adherence to digitally collected PROs. MethodThe study comprises of three steps: (1) a systematic literature review (SLR) focusing on factors increasing PRO response rates, (2) focus group interviews with patients to develop criteria on how to increase response rates for real-world evidence (RWE), and subsequently, (3) an anonymous online survey to evaluate developed criteria. The SLR will follow the PRISMA guidelines. The inclusion criteria for the review encompass studies focusing exclusively on patients or people recruited via medical personnel. The literature review will include studies from various settings, encompassing publications in German or English language published within the past 10 years (2014-2024). Participants for the focus group interviews (n = 6-8/group) will be recruited via patient advisory boards or groups/organisations. The findings of the SLR and the focus group form the basis for the anonymous online survey to include more patients. OutlookThe results of the study can be incorporated into the development and implementation of digital collection methods for PROs, with the aim of improving adherence to PROs and thus robustness of RWE data.
Matching journals
The top 2 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- The use of the positive deviance approach for healthcare system service improvement: A scoping review protocol 94%
- Face-to-face interventions to encourage enrolment in cardiac rehabilitation; a scoping review protocol 94%
- Synthesizing evidence regarding community-based volunteer facilitated programs supporting integrated care transitions from hospital to home: A scoping review protocol 94%
Similar papers in this journal
- Development of a consensus extension of the estimands framework for cluster randomised trials (CRT-estimands): results from an international Delphi study 93%
- Development and evaluation of rapid data-enabled access to routine clinical information to enhance early recruitment to the national clinical platform trial of COVID-19 community treatments 92%
- Supporting Reanalysis and Reuse of Clinical Trial Data: A Case Study 92%
Similar papers in this journal
- STIMULATE-ICP-Delphi (Symptoms, Trajectory, Inequalities and Management: Understanding Long-COVID to Address and Transform Existing Integrated Care Pathways Delphi): Study Protocol 94%
- Wellbeing Impact Study of High-Speed 2 (WISH2): Protocol for a mixed-methods examination of the impact of major transport infrastructure development on mental health and wellbeing 94%
- Investigating the use of a one-page infographic to improve recruitment and retention to the BASIL+ Randomised Controlled Trial: A Study Within a Trial (SWAT) 94%
Similar papers in this journal
- Improving the impact of pharmacy interventions in hospitals 93%
- Improving local authority financial support services for users with complex health needs: a mixed-method economic evaluation of Social Navigators in South Tyneside, UK 92%
- National statutory reporting: not even ticking the boxes? The quality of ‘Learning from Deaths’ reporting in Quality Accounts within the NHS in England 2017-2020 92%
Similar papers in this journal
- Consent to Recontact for Future Research Using Linked Primary Healthcare Data: Outcomes and General Practice Perceptions from the ATHENA COVID-19 Study 92%
- Use of estimands in cluster randomised trials: a review 92%
- Effects of Health Technology Use and Digital Health Engagement on Clinical Trial Participation: Findings from the Health Information National Trends Survey 91%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.