Educational Targets for Patient-Reported Outcomes and Caregiver-Reported Outcomes in Psycho-oncology Research.

IF 1.3 4区 医学 Q3 EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES
Salene M W Jones, Erin E Kent, Maxime Caru, Hannah Arem, Youngmee Kim, Lixin Song, Shelby L Langer
{"title":"Educational Targets for Patient-Reported Outcomes and Caregiver-Reported Outcomes in Psycho-oncology Research.","authors":"Salene M W Jones, Erin E Kent, Maxime Caru, Hannah Arem, Youngmee Kim, Lixin Song, Shelby L Langer","doi":"10.1007/s13187-025-02709-9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and caregiver-reported outcomes (CROs) are tools for evaluating behavioral medicine interventions and for bringing the patient voice into observational research. This study aimed to identify barriers to using PROs/CROs in behavioral cancer research and to equitably address those barriers. Forty-nine members of a cancer special interest group from a research society completed surveys in early 2023 about needs related to the use of PROs and CROs. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize results. Most participants used PROs (n = 34, 69%) but few frequently used CROs (n = 12, 24%). More than 80% of the sample were familiar with common PRO/CRO properties such as reliability and validity. Participants reported considering a wide variety of population characteristics when using PROs and CROs, including language (n = 31, 70%) and education level (n = 31, 70%). The most common barriers to using PROs/CROs in research were time, funding, and technology with many reflecting potential reasons for inequitable representation of certain groups in research. Webinars were the most preferred educational format (n = 38, 78%) for resources related to PROs/CROs. Many participants encountered barriers to using PROs in research. Creation and dissemination of educational resources to promote equitable use of PROs/CROs across underrepresented groups and overcome common barriers to use of these measurement tools are warranted.</p>","PeriodicalId":50246,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Cancer Education","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Cancer Education","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s13187-025-02709-9","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and caregiver-reported outcomes (CROs) are tools for evaluating behavioral medicine interventions and for bringing the patient voice into observational research. This study aimed to identify barriers to using PROs/CROs in behavioral cancer research and to equitably address those barriers. Forty-nine members of a cancer special interest group from a research society completed surveys in early 2023 about needs related to the use of PROs and CROs. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize results. Most participants used PROs (n = 34, 69%) but few frequently used CROs (n = 12, 24%). More than 80% of the sample were familiar with common PRO/CRO properties such as reliability and validity. Participants reported considering a wide variety of population characteristics when using PROs and CROs, including language (n = 31, 70%) and education level (n = 31, 70%). The most common barriers to using PROs/CROs in research were time, funding, and technology with many reflecting potential reasons for inequitable representation of certain groups in research. Webinars were the most preferred educational format (n = 38, 78%) for resources related to PROs/CROs. Many participants encountered barriers to using PROs in research. Creation and dissemination of educational resources to promote equitable use of PROs/CROs across underrepresented groups and overcome common barriers to use of these measurement tools are warranted.

心理肿瘤学研究中患者报告结果和护理人员报告结果的教育目标。
患者报告结果(PROs)和护理者报告结果(cro)是评估行为医学干预措施和将患者声音纳入观察性研究的工具。本研究旨在确定在行为癌症研究中使用pro / cro的障碍,并公平地解决这些障碍。来自某研究学会的一个癌症特殊兴趣小组的49名成员于2023年初完成了有关PROs和cro使用需求的调查。采用描述性统计对结果进行汇总。大多数参与者使用pro (n = 34, 69%),但很少经常使用cro (n = 12, 24%)。超过80%的样本熟悉常见的PRO/CRO属性,如信度和效度。参与者报告说,在使用pro和cro时考虑了各种各样的人群特征,包括语言(n = 31, 70%)和教育水平(n = 31, 70%)。在研究中使用pro / cro最常见的障碍是时间、资金和技术,其中许多反映了某些群体在研究中不公平代表性的潜在原因。网络研讨会是最受欢迎的教育形式(n = 38, 78%)。许多参与者在研究中遇到了使用PROs的障碍。有必要创建和传播教育资源,以促进在代表性不足的群体中公平使用PROs/ cro,并克服使用这些测量工具的共同障碍。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Cancer Education
Journal of Cancer Education 医学-医学:信息
CiteScore
3.40
自引率
6.20%
发文量
122
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Cancer Education, the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education (AACE) and the European Association for Cancer Education (EACE), is an international, quarterly journal dedicated to the publication of original contributions dealing with the varied aspects of cancer education for physicians, dentists, nurses, students, social workers and other allied health professionals, patients, the general public, and anyone interested in effective education about cancer related issues. Articles featured include reports of original results of educational research, as well as discussions of current problems and techniques in cancer education. Manuscripts are welcome on such subjects as educational methods, instruments, and program evaluation. Suitable topics include teaching of basic science aspects of cancer; the assessment of attitudes toward cancer patient management; the teaching of diagnostic skills relevant to cancer; the evaluation of undergraduate, postgraduate, or continuing education programs; and articles about all aspects of cancer education from prevention to palliative care. We encourage contributions to a special column called Reflections; these articles should relate to the human aspects of dealing with cancer, cancer patients, and their families and finding meaning and support in these efforts. Letters to the Editor (600 words or less) dealing with published articles or matters of current interest are also invited. Also featured are commentary; book and media reviews; and announcements of educational programs, fellowships, and grants. Articles should be limited to no more than ten double-spaced typed pages, and there should be no more than three tables or figures and 25 references. We also encourage brief reports of five typewritten pages or less, with no more than one figure or table and 15 references.
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信