Impact of patient-reported outcome measures on routine practice: a structured review.

By S. Marshall, K. Haywood, R. Fitzpatrick. Journal of Evaluation In Clinical Practice, 2006

618 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: General Health Professions, Oncology, Social Psychology

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/36f56b8f51e70d7ee5629d043dc261b68f65afcc

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In General Health Professions

1. Joanne Greenhalgh
2. Jack Chen
3. L. Ou
4. N. Aaronson
5. S. Hollis

In Oncology

1. Joanne Greenhalgh
2. Jack Chen
3. L. Ou
4. S. Hollis

In Social Psychology

1. Joanne Greenhalgh
2. Jack Chen
3. L. Ou
4. B. Reeve
5. S. Hollis

Citations in the corpus

• The applications of PROs in clinical practice: what are they, do they work, and why? (2009, methodology): “Much of the literature on the use of PROs in clinical practice has focussed on their use as a screening tool [2, 8, 9].”
• Implementing patient-reported outcomes assessment in clinical practice: a review of the options and considerations (2012, background): “Research has shown that integration of PROs in clinical practice improves patient– clinician communication and in some cases, enhances patient care and outcomes [2–4].”
• A systematic review of the impact of routine collection of patient reported outcome measures on patients, providers and health organisations in an oncologic setting (2013, methodology): “Some rationales [25-28] put forward for measuring PROs in a cancer setting include, but not”