Back

Multilevel Factors Associated with Nonresponse to Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in Routine Radiation Oncology Care

Liu, J. B.; Chen, Y.-J.; Edelen, M. O.; Pusic, A. L.; Martin, N. E.; Zeng, C.

2026-07-17 health systems and quality improvement
10.64898/2026.07.15.26358162 medRxiv
Show abstract

Purpose: Nonresponse to routinely collected patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) threatens the representativeness of aggregated data. We characterized patient-, provider-, and clinic-level factors associated with PROMIS Global-10 nonresponse in routine radiation oncology care. Methods: In this retrospective cohort study, all adults seen at five Mass General Brigham radiation oncology clinics over one year were included. The primary outcome was patient-level nonresponse, defined as never completing the portal-administered Global-10 versus completing it at least once. Using iterative mixed-effects logistic regression, we modeled patient-, provider-, and clinic-level factors. Results: Among 12,214 patients, 71 providers, and five clinics, patient- and appointment-level response rates were 35.4% and 10.9%, with patient-level response ranging nearly fivefold across clinics (12.8% to 66.2%). In Model 1, male sex, lower education, not working, and recent surgery had higher odds of nonresponse, and longer time since diagnosis lower odds. After provider- and clinic-level factors were added, patient sex, education, and employment became nonsignificant, whereas recent surgery (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1.97) and longer time since diagnosis (aOR 0.46 for >12 months) persisted. A provider's historical collection rate was protective but attenuated at the clinic level. There, a later program launch (aOR 0.29) and higher historical collection rate (aOR 0.79) correlated with lower nonresponse, whereas academic versus community setting did not. Conclusions: Nonresponse to routinely collected PROMs is a multilevel phenomenon driven substantially by clinic-level implementation factors, not patient characteristics alone. Because response rate is only a proxy for representativeness, PROMs programs and PRO-based performance measures should prioritize representative collection over volume.

Matching journals

The top 7 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
PLOS ONE
5266 papers in training set
Top 10%
18.8%
2
International Journal of Radiation Oncology*Biology*Physics
25 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
10.8%
3
JAMA Network Open
130 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
5.6%
4
BMJ Open
601 papers in training set
Top 5%
4.9%
5
Medicine
31 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
4.4%
6
Cancers
213 papers in training set
Top 1%
4.1%
7
Journal of General Internal Medicine
21 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
3.3%
50% of probability mass above
8
Biometrics
23 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
3.3%
9
The Lancet Regional Health - Americas
22 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
3.3%
10
Clinical Trials
11 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
2.8%
11
Scientific Reports
3612 papers in training set
Top 39%
2.7%
12
PLOS Global Public Health
344 papers in training set
Top 5%
2.4%
13
BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making
43 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
2.1%
14
JCO Clinical Cancer Informatics
22 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.9%
15
BMC Medical Research Methodology
47 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
1.7%
16
Annals of Internal Medicine
28 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.5%
17
Radiotherapy and Oncology
19 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.5%
18
BMJ Open Quality
17 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.5%
19
Communications Medicine
113 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.4%
20
Journal of Clinical Epidemiology
31 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
1.4%
21
Nature Communications
5641 papers in training set
Top 50%
1.1%
22
Medical Decision Making
12 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.1%
23
BMJ Health & Care Informatics
15 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
1.0%
24
BMC Cancer
67 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.0%
25
JNCI Cancer Spectrum
10 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
0.9%
26
Disaster Medicine and Public Health Preparedness
16 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
0.9%
27
BMC Health Services Research
51 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.9%
28
Journal of Clinical and Translational Science
14 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
0.9%
29
eLife
5828 papers in training set
Top 68%
0.6%