» Articles » PMID: 17668293

Issues in the Design of Internet-based Systems for Collecting Patient-reported Outcomes

Overview
Journal Qual Life Res
Date 2007 Aug 2
PMID 17668293
Citations 36
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background And Objectives: Although there is a growing interest in using patient-reported outcomes (PRO) to monitor disease progression and/or therapeutic response, to improve care, and to screen for physical or psychosocial problems in routine clinical practice, PRO instruments can be difficult to administer, score, and interpret in this setting. Internet-based approaches to PRO collection may help overcome these obstacles. This paper discusses the rationale for using the Internet for routine PRO collection, summarizes relevant literature and ongoing projects, and raises several key design and development issues that should guide further efforts in this area.

Major Findings: A small number of Internet-based PRO collection applications have been or are currently being developed. The major characteristics of several of these projects are reviewed and summarized. Successful Internet-based PRO collection applications must address patient and clinician-specific needs related to workflow and to the way in which results are presented. A growing number of instruments have been adapted for and evaluated in a web-based format.

Conclusions: Collecting PROs via the Internet has the potential to overcome many of the challenges associated with efforts to routinely use PROs in the clinical encounter.

Citing Articles

A Behavior-Based Model to Validate Electronic Systems Designed to Collect Patient-Reported Outcomes: Model Development and Application.

Attamimi S, Marshman Z, Deery C, Radley S, Gilchrist F JMIR Form Res. 2024; 8:e56370.

PMID: 39288407 PMC: 11445622. DOI: 10.2196/56370.


Multilingual Framework for Risk Assessment and Symptom Tracking (MRAST).

Safran V, Lin S, Nateqi J, Martin A, Smrke U, Arioz U Sensors (Basel). 2024; 24(4).

PMID: 38400259 PMC: 10892413. DOI: 10.3390/s24041101.


Feasibility of PROMIS using computerized adaptive testing during inpatient rehabilitation.

Rafiq R, Yount S, Jerousek S, Roth E, Cella D, Albert M J Patient Rep Outcomes. 2023; 7(1):44.

PMID: 37162607 PMC: 10172423. DOI: 10.1186/s41687-023-00567-x.


Patient-Reported Outcomes (PROs) in HIV Infection: Points to Consider and Challenges.

Antela A, Bernardino J, de Quiros J, Bachiller P, Fuster-RuizdeApodaca M, Puig J Infect Dis Ther. 2022; 11(5):2017-2033.

PMID: 36066841 PMC: 9618004. DOI: 10.1007/s40121-022-00678-w.


Technological developments enable measuring and using patient-reported outcomes data in orthopaedic clinical practice.

Hamilton D, Giesinger J, Giesinger K World J Orthop. 2020; 11(12):584-594.

PMID: 33362994 PMC: 7745490. DOI: 10.5312/wjo.v11.i12.584.


References
1.
Hodge Jr J . Health information privacy and public health. J Law Med Ethics. 2004; 31(4):663-71. DOI: 10.1111/j.1748-720x.2003.tb00133.x. View

2.
Wright E, Selby P, Crawford M, Gillibrand A, Johnston C, Perren T . Feasibility and compliance of automated measurement of quality of life in oncology practice. J Clin Oncol. 2003; 21(2):374-82. DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2003.11.044. View

3.
Mullen K, Berry D, Zierler B . Computerized symptom and quality-of-life assessment for patients with cancer part II: acceptability and usability. Oncol Nurs Forum. 2004; 31(5):E84-9. DOI: 10.1188/04.ONF.E84-E89. View

4.
Thissen D, Reeve B, Bjorner J, Chang C . Methodological issues for building item banks and computerized adaptive scales. Qual Life Res. 2007; 16 Suppl 1:109-19. DOI: 10.1007/s11136-007-9169-5. View

5.
Lumpkin J . e-health, HIPAA, and beyond. Health Aff (Millwood). 2001; 19(6):149-51. DOI: 10.1377/hlthaff.19.6.149. View