在风险预测模型开发中使用患者报告结果以支持癌症护理服务:范围综述》。

IF 3.3 Q2 ONCOLOGY JCO Clinical Cancer Informatics Pub Date : 2024-11-01 DOI:10.1200/CCI-24-00145
Roshan Paudel, Samira Dias, Carrie G Wade, Christine Cronin, Michael J Hassett
{"title":"在风险预测模型开发中使用患者报告结果以支持癌症护理服务:范围综述》。","authors":"Roshan Paudel, Samira Dias, Carrie G Wade, Christine Cronin, Michael J Hassett","doi":"10.1200/CCI-24-00145","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The integration of patient-reported outcomes (PROs) into electronic health records (EHRs) has enabled systematic collection of symptom data to manage post-treatment symptoms. The use and integration of PRO data into routine care are associated with overall treatment success, adherence, and satisfaction. Clinical trials have demonstrated the prognostic value of PROs including physical function and global health status in predicting survival. It is unknown to what extent routinely collected PRO data are used in the development of risk prediction models (RPMs) in oncology care. The objective of the scoping review is to assess how PROs are used to train risk RPMs to predict patient outcomes in oncology care.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Using the scoping review methodology outlined in the Joanna Briggs Institute Manual for Evidence Synthesis, we searched four databases (MEDLINE, CINAHL, Embase, and Web of Science) to locate peer-reviewed oncology articles that used PROs as predictors to train models. Study characteristics including settings, clinical outcomes, and model training, testing, validation, and performance data were extracted for analyses.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of the 1,254 studies identified, 18 met inclusion criteria. Most studies performed retrospective analyses of prospectively collected PRO data to build prediction models. Post-treatment survival was the most common outcome predicted. Discriminative performance of models trained using PROs was better than models trained without PROs. Most studies did not report model calibration.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Systematic collection of PROs in routine practice provides an opportunity to use patient-reported data to develop RPMs. Model performance improves when PROs are used in combination with other comprehensive data sources.</p>","PeriodicalId":51626,"journal":{"name":"JCO Clinical Cancer Informatics","volume":"8 ","pages":"e2400145"},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11534280/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Use of Patient-Reported Outcomes in Risk Prediction Model Development to Support Cancer Care Delivery: A Scoping Review.\",\"authors\":\"Roshan Paudel, Samira Dias, Carrie G Wade, Christine Cronin, Michael J Hassett\",\"doi\":\"10.1200/CCI-24-00145\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The integration of patient-reported outcomes (PROs) into electronic health records (EHRs) has enabled systematic collection of symptom data to manage post-treatment symptoms. The use and integration of PRO data into routine care are associated with overall treatment success, adherence, and satisfaction. Clinical trials have demonstrated the prognostic value of PROs including physical function and global health status in predicting survival. It is unknown to what extent routinely collected PRO data are used in the development of risk prediction models (RPMs) in oncology care. The objective of the scoping review is to assess how PROs are used to train risk RPMs to predict patient outcomes in oncology care.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Using the scoping review methodology outlined in the Joanna Briggs Institute Manual for Evidence Synthesis, we searched four databases (MEDLINE, CINAHL, Embase, and Web of Science) to locate peer-reviewed oncology articles that used PROs as predictors to train models. Study characteristics including settings, clinical outcomes, and model training, testing, validation, and performance data were extracted for analyses.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of the 1,254 studies identified, 18 met inclusion criteria. Most studies performed retrospective analyses of prospectively collected PRO data to build prediction models. Post-treatment survival was the most common outcome predicted. Discriminative performance of models trained using PROs was better than models trained without PROs. Most studies did not report model calibration.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Systematic collection of PROs in routine practice provides an opportunity to use patient-reported data to develop RPMs. Model performance improves when PROs are used in combination with other comprehensive data sources.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":51626,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"JCO Clinical Cancer Informatics\",\"volume\":\"8 \",\"pages\":\"e2400145\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11534280/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"JCO Clinical Cancer Informatics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1200/CCI-24-00145\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ONCOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JCO Clinical Cancer Informatics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1200/CCI-24-00145","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:将患者报告结果(PROs)整合到电子健康记录(EHRs)中可以系统地收集症状数据,以管理治疗后症状。在日常护理中使用和整合患者报告结果数据与整体治疗的成功率、依从性和满意度有关。临床试验证明,包括身体功能和总体健康状况在内的 PROs 在预测生存方面具有预后价值。目前尚不清楚常规收集的 PRO 数据在肿瘤治疗风险预测模型 (RPM) 开发中的应用程度。此次范围界定综述的目的是评估 PROs 如何用于训练风险预测模型,以预测肿瘤治疗中的患者预后:采用乔安娜-布里格斯研究所《证据综合手册》中概述的范围界定综述方法,我们检索了四个数据库(MEDLINE、CINAHL、Embase 和 Web of Science),以查找使用 PROs 作为预测因子来训练模型的同行评审肿瘤学文章。我们提取了包括研究环境、临床结果以及模型训练、测试、验证和性能数据在内的研究特征进行分析:在确定的 1,254 项研究中,有 18 项符合纳入标准。大多数研究对前瞻性收集的PRO数据进行了回顾性分析,以建立预测模型。治疗后生存期是最常见的预测结果。使用PROs训练的模型的判别性能优于未使用PROs训练的模型。大多数研究未报告模型校准情况:结论:在常规实践中系统收集PROs为使用患者报告数据开发RPMs提供了机会。如果结合其他全面的数据源使用患者健康状况调查,模型的性能将得到改善。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Use of Patient-Reported Outcomes in Risk Prediction Model Development to Support Cancer Care Delivery: A Scoping Review.

Purpose: The integration of patient-reported outcomes (PROs) into electronic health records (EHRs) has enabled systematic collection of symptom data to manage post-treatment symptoms. The use and integration of PRO data into routine care are associated with overall treatment success, adherence, and satisfaction. Clinical trials have demonstrated the prognostic value of PROs including physical function and global health status in predicting survival. It is unknown to what extent routinely collected PRO data are used in the development of risk prediction models (RPMs) in oncology care. The objective of the scoping review is to assess how PROs are used to train risk RPMs to predict patient outcomes in oncology care.

Methods: Using the scoping review methodology outlined in the Joanna Briggs Institute Manual for Evidence Synthesis, we searched four databases (MEDLINE, CINAHL, Embase, and Web of Science) to locate peer-reviewed oncology articles that used PROs as predictors to train models. Study characteristics including settings, clinical outcomes, and model training, testing, validation, and performance data were extracted for analyses.

Results: Of the 1,254 studies identified, 18 met inclusion criteria. Most studies performed retrospective analyses of prospectively collected PRO data to build prediction models. Post-treatment survival was the most common outcome predicted. Discriminative performance of models trained using PROs was better than models trained without PROs. Most studies did not report model calibration.

Conclusion: Systematic collection of PROs in routine practice provides an opportunity to use patient-reported data to develop RPMs. Model performance improves when PROs are used in combination with other comprehensive data sources.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.20
自引率
4.80%
发文量
190
期刊最新文献
Identifying Oncology Patients at High Risk for Potentially Preventable Emergency Department Visits Using a Novel Definition. Use of Patient-Reported Outcomes in Risk Prediction Model Development to Support Cancer Care Delivery: A Scoping Review. Optimizing End Points for Phase III Cancer Trials. Patients Facing Large Language Models in Oncology: A Narrative Review. Remote Patient Monitoring Using Mobile Health Technology in Cancer Care and Research: Patients' Views and Preferences.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1