Top

Published in:

01-03-2016 | Editorial

Introduction to special section on patient-reported outcomes in nonstandard settings

Authors: Carolyn E. Schwartz, Dennis A. Revicki

Published in: Quality of Life Research | Issue 3/2016

Excerpt

Patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures are increasingly being used in unprecedented contexts due to the growth in technology, quantitative methods for developing and evaluating tools, and the accessibility of sophisticated ways of collecting and displaying data. Although many manuscripts that cross our path as editors report on the use of PROs in formal research settings (e.g., randomized clinical trials and epidemiology cohort studies), it is clear that there has been substantial growth recently in the use of social media, smart phone apps, and other computer-based devices. These applications highlight the potential for PROs to be deployed fruitfully in novel settings that can inform and impact population health. …

Schneider, S., & Stone, A. A. (2016). Diary methods can facilitate the measurement of patient reported outcomes. Quality of Life Research (in press).

Carlson, E., Field, N. P., Ruzek, J. I., Bryant, R. A., Dalenberg, C. J., Keane, T. M., et al. (2016) Advantages and psychometric validation of proximal, intensive assessments of patient reported outcomes collected in daily life. Quality of Life Research (in press).

Colla, L., Fuller-Tyszkiewicz, M., Tomyn, A., Richardson, B., & Tomyn, J. (2016). Use of ecological momentary assessment data to enhance evaluation of a subjective wellbeing intervention. Quality of Life Research (in press).

Schougaard, L. M. V., Larsen, L. P., Jessen, A., Sidenius, P., Dorflinger, L., de Thurah, A., et al. (2016). AmbuFlex: Experiences with large scale implementation of patient-reported outcomes (PRO) in clinical practice. Quality of Life Research (in press).

Bennett, A. V., Reeve, B. B., Basch, E., Mitchell, S., Meeneghan, M., Battaglini, C., et al. (2016). Evaluation of pedometry as a patient-centered outcome in patients undergoing hematopoietic cell transplant (HCT): A comparison of pedometry and patient-reports of symptoms, health, and quality of life. Quality of Life Research (in press).

Marshall, S. A., Yang, C. C., Ping, Q., Zhao, M., Avis, N. A., Ip, E. H. (2016). Comparison of symptom clusters in breast cancer patients derived from social media data and research study data. Quality of Life Research (in press).

Dillman, D. A., Smyth, J. D., & Christian, L. M. (2014). Internet, phone, mail, and mixed-mode surveys: The tailored design method (4th ed.). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.

Ziegenfuss, J. Y., Beebe, T. J., Rey, E., Schleck, C., Locke, G. R., & Talley, N. J. (2010). Internet option in a mail survey: More harm than good? Letter to the editor. Epidemiology and Infection, 21(4), 585–586.

Rutherford, C., Costa, D. S. J., Mercieca-Bebber, R., Rice, H., Gabb, L., King, M. (2016). Mode of administration does not cause bias in patient-reported outcome results: A meta-analysis. Quality of Life Research (in press).

10.

Sharma, P., Dunn, R. L., Wei, J. T., Montie, J. E., Gilbert, S. M. (2016). Evaluation of point-of-care patient-reported outcome assessment in clinic settings: Integration, parallel-forms reliability, and patient acceptability of electronic quality of life measures during clinic visits. Quality of Life Research (in press).

11.

Barthel, D., Fischer, K. I., Nolte, S., Otto, C., Meyrose, A. K., Reisinger, S., et al. (2016). Implementation of the Kids-CAT in clinical settings: A newly developed computer-adaptive test to facilitate the assessment of patient-reported outcomes of children and adolescents in clinical practice in Germany. Quality of Life Research (2016).

12.

Kuijpers, W., Giesinger, J. M., Zabernigg, A., Young, T., Friend, E., Tomaszewska, I. M., et al. (2016). Patients’ and health professionals’ understanding of and preferences for graphical presentation styles for individual level EORTC QLQ-C30 scores. Quality of Life Research (in press).

13.

Llewellyn, A., & Skevington, S. (2016). Evaluating a new methodology for providing individualized feedback in healthcare on quality of life and its importance, using the WHOQOL-BREF in the community. Quality of Life Research (in press).

14.

Johnston, K., Lawrence, S., Dodds, N., Yu, L., Daley, D. C., Pilkonis, P. A. (2016). Evaluating PROMIS^® instruments and methods for patient-centered outcomes research: Patient and provider voices in a substance use treatment setting. Quality of Life Research (in press).

Title: Introduction to special section on patient-reported outcomes in nonstandard settings
Authors: Carolyn E. Schwartz
Dennis A. Revicki
Publication date: 01-03-2016
Publisher: Springer International Publishing
Published in: Quality of Life Research / Issue 3/2016
Print ISSN: 0962-9343
Electronic ISSN: 1573-2649
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-016-1228-3

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Introduction to special section on patient-reported outcomes in nonstandard settings

Excerpt

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Excerpt

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 3/2016

Ambulatory and diary methods can facilitate the measurement of patient-reported outcomes

The effectiveness of a preventive health program and vitamin D status in improving health-related quality of life of older Canadians

Evaluating PROMIS® instruments and methods for patient-centered outcomes research: Patient and provider voices in a substance use treatment setting

Evaluating a new methodology for providing individualized feedback in healthcare on quality of life and its importance, using the WHOQOL-BREF in a community population

Mode of administration does not cause bias in patient-reported outcome results: a meta-analysis

Evaluation of pedometry as a patient-centered outcome in patients undergoing hematopoietic cell transplant (HCT): a comparison of pedometry and patient reports of symptoms, health, and quality of life