| Title |
Using patient-reported outcomes and PROMIS in research and clinical applications: experiences from the PCORI pilot projects
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Quality of Life Research, February 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11136-016-1246-1 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Clifton O. Bingham, Susan J. Bartlett, Peter A. Merkel, Thelma J. Mielenz, Paul A. Pilkonis, Lauren Edmundson, Emily Moore, Rajeev K. Sabharwal |
| Abstract |
The field of patient-centered outcomes research (PCOR) continues to develop. Patient-reported outcomes and, in particular the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) contribute complementary data to clinician-derived outcomes traditionally used in health decision-making. However, there has been little work to understand how PROMIS measures may inform or be integrated into PCOR or clinical applications. Lead investigators from four pilot projects funded by the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI) collaborated to discuss lessons learned about the use of PROMIS in PCOR studies via virtual and in-person meetings. In addition, a qualitative data collection tool was used to assess the pilot projects' experiences. Lessons learned from the pilot projects centered on practical elements of research design, such as choosing the right outcomes to study, considering the advantages and limitations of the PROMIS short forms and computer adaptive technology versions, planning ahead for a feasible data collection process, maintaining the focus on patients by ensuring that the research is truly patient-centered, and helping patients and providers make the most of PROMIS in care. The PCORI pilot projects demonstrated that PROMIS can be successfully used to conduct research that will help patients make decisions about their care. Interest in PCOR continues to grow and the lessons learned from these projects about the use of PROMIS will be helpful to investigators. Given the numerous benefits of PROMIS, implementing this tool in research and care will hopefully lead to significant progress in measuring health outcomes that are meaningful and relevant to all stakeholders. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 2 | 67% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 67% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 79 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 79 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 16 | 20% |
| Student > Master | 12 | 15% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 10 | 13% |
| Other | 6 | 8% |
| Professor | 5 | 6% |
| Other | 19 | 24% |
| Unknown | 11 | 14% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 31 | 39% |
| Social Sciences | 8 | 10% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 7 | 9% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 3 | 4% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 3 | 4% |
| Other | 11 | 14% |
| Unknown | 16 | 20% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 15 July 2016.
All research outputs
#14,839,922
of 22,852,911 outputs
Outputs from Quality of Life Research
#1,598
of 2,846 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#167,229
of 298,590 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Quality of Life Research
#29
of 57 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,852,911 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,846 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.6. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 298,590 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 57 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.