Multilevel factors associated with nonresponse to patient-reported outcome measures in routine radiation oncology care.

IF 3.4 3区 医学 Q1 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Jason B Liu, Yu-Jen Chen, Maria O Edelen, Andrea L Pusic, Neil E Martin, Chengbo Zeng
{"title":"Multilevel factors associated with nonresponse to patient-reported outcome measures in routine radiation oncology care.","authors":"Jason B Liu, Yu-Jen Chen, Maria O Edelen, Andrea L Pusic, Neil E Martin, Chengbo Zeng","doi":"10.1007/s11136-026-04383-w","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Nonresponse to routinely collected patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) threatens the representativeness of aggregated data. We characterized patient-, provider-, and clinic-level factors associated with PROMIS Global-10 nonresponse in routine radiation oncology care.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In this retrospective cohort study, all adults seen at five Mass General Brigham radiation oncology clinics over one year were included. The primary outcome was patient-level nonresponse, defined as never completing the portal-administered Global-10 versus completing it at least once. Using iterative mixed-effects logistic regression, we modeled patient-, provider-, and clinic-level factors.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among 12,214 patients, 71 providers, and five clinics, patient- and appointment-level response rates were 35.4% and 31.7%, with patient-level response ranging nearly fivefold across clinics (12.8% to 66.2%). In Model 1, male sex, lower education, not working, and recent surgery had higher odds of nonresponse, and longer time since diagnosis lower odds. After provider- and clinic-level factors were added, patient sex, education, and employment became nonsignificant, whereas recent surgery (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1.97) and longer time since diagnosis (aOR 0.46 for > 12 months) persisted. A provider's historical collection rate was protective but attenuated at the clinic level. There, a later program launch (aOR 0.29) and higher historical collection rate (aOR 0.79) correlated with lower nonresponse, whereas academic versus community setting did not.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Nonresponse to routinely collected PROMs is a multilevel phenomenon driven substantially by clinic-level implementation factors, not patient characteristics alone. Because response rate is only a proxy for representativeness, PROMs programs and PRO-based performance measures should prioritize representative collection over volume.</p>","PeriodicalId":20748,"journal":{"name":"Quality of Life Research","volume":"35 10","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2026-09-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13585823/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Quality of Life Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-026-04383-w","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: Nonresponse to routinely collected patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) threatens the representativeness of aggregated data. We characterized patient-, provider-, and clinic-level factors associated with PROMIS Global-10 nonresponse in routine radiation oncology care.

Methods: In this retrospective cohort study, all adults seen at five Mass General Brigham radiation oncology clinics over one year were included. The primary outcome was patient-level nonresponse, defined as never completing the portal-administered Global-10 versus completing it at least once. Using iterative mixed-effects logistic regression, we modeled patient-, provider-, and clinic-level factors.

Results: Among 12,214 patients, 71 providers, and five clinics, patient- and appointment-level response rates were 35.4% and 31.7%, with patient-level response ranging nearly fivefold across clinics (12.8% to 66.2%). In Model 1, male sex, lower education, not working, and recent surgery had higher odds of nonresponse, and longer time since diagnosis lower odds. After provider- and clinic-level factors were added, patient sex, education, and employment became nonsignificant, whereas recent surgery (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1.97) and longer time since diagnosis (aOR 0.46 for > 12 months) persisted. A provider's historical collection rate was protective but attenuated at the clinic level. There, a later program launch (aOR 0.29) and higher historical collection rate (aOR 0.79) correlated with lower nonresponse, whereas academic versus community setting did not.

Conclusions: Nonresponse to routinely collected PROMs is a multilevel phenomenon driven substantially by clinic-level implementation factors, not patient characteristics alone. Because response rate is only a proxy for representativeness, PROMs programs and PRO-based performance measures should prioritize representative collection over volume.

在常规放射肿瘤学治疗中,与患者报告的结果测量无反应相关的多水平因素。
目的:对常规收集的患者报告结果测量(PROMs)无反应威胁到汇总数据的代表性。我们分析了常规放射肿瘤学治疗中与PROMIS Global-10无反应相关的患者、提供者和临床水平因素。方法:在这项回顾性队列研究中,包括了在五家麻省总医院布里格姆放射肿瘤学诊所就诊的所有成年人。主要结果是患者水平无反应,定义为从未完成门户网站管理的Global-10与至少完成一次。使用迭代混合效应逻辑回归,我们模拟了患者、提供者和临床水平的因素。结果:在12214名患者、71名提供者和5家诊所中,患者和预约水平的反应率分别为35.4%和31.7%,患者水平的反应率在各个诊所之间相差近5倍(12.8%至66.2%)。在模型1中,男性、受教育程度较低、没有工作和最近手术的患者无反应的几率较高,诊断后时间较长则低。在加入提供者和临床水平的因素后,患者的性别、教育程度和就业变得不重要,而最近的手术(调整优势比[aOR] 1.97)和诊断后较长的时间(aOR为0.46)仍然存在。提供者的历史收集率具有保护作用,但在临床水平上有所减弱。在那里,较晚的项目启动(aOR 0.29)和较高的历史收集率(aOR 0.79)与较低的无反应相关,而学术环境与社区环境无关。结论:对常规收集的PROMs无反应是一个多层面的现象,主要由临床层面的实施因素驱动,而不仅仅是患者的特征。因为响应率只是代表性的一个代理,所以prom程序和基于pro的性能度量应该优先考虑代表性收集而不是数量。
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
Quality of Life Research
Quality of Life Research 医学-公共卫生、环境卫生与职业卫生
CiteScore
6.50
自引率
8.60%
发文量
224
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Quality of Life Research is an international, multidisciplinary journal devoted to the rapid communication of original research, theoretical articles and methodological reports related to the field of quality of life, in all the health sciences. The journal also offers editorials, literature, book and software reviews, correspondence and abstracts of conferences. Quality of life has become a prominent issue in biometry, philosophy, social science, clinical medicine, health services and outcomes research. The journal''s scope reflects the wide application of quality of life assessment and research in the biological and social sciences. All original work is subject to peer review for originality, scientific quality and relevance to a broad readership. This is an official journal of the International Society of Quality of Life Research.
×
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
小红书