Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Patient-reported outcome measurement implementation in cancer survivors: a systematic review

  • Review
  • Published:
Journal of Cancer Survivorship Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

Patient-reported outcome measurements (PROMs) are increasingly used for cancer patients receiving active treatment, but little is known about the implementation and usefulness of PROMs in cancer survivorship care. This systematic review evaluates how cancer survivors and healthcare providers (HCPs) perceive PROM implementation in survivorship care, and how PROM implementation impacts cancer survivors’ health outcomes.

Methods

We systematically searched PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, Web of Science, and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews from database inception to February 2022 to identify randomized and nonrandomized studies of PROM implementation in cancer survivors.

Results

Based on prespecified eligibility criteria, we included 29 studies that reported on 26 unique PROMs. The studies were heterogeneous in study design, PROM instrument, patient demographics, and outcomes. Several studies found that cancer survivors and HCPs had favorable impressions of the utility of PROMs, and a few studies demonstrated that PROM implementation led to improvements in patient quality of life (QoL), with small to moderate effect sizes.

Conclusions

We found implementation of PROMs in cancer survivorship care improved health outcomes for select patient populations. Future research is needed to assess the real-world utility of PROM integration into clinical workflows and the impact of PROMs on measurable health outcomes.

Implications for Cancer Survivors.

Cancer survivors accepted PROMs. When successfully implemented, PROMs can improve health outcomes after completion of active treatment. We identify multiple avenues to strengthen PROM implementation to support cancer survivors.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

Abbreviations

ADT:

Androgen-deprivation therapy

AUC:

Area under the curve

AYA:

Adolescent and young adult

CINAHL:

Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature

HCP:

Healthcare provider

HRQoL:

Health-related quality of life

NR:

Not reported

PM&R:

Physical medicine and rehabilitation

PRO:

Patient-reported outcome

PROM:

Patient-reported outcome measurement

QoL:

Quality of life

References

  1. Food and Drug Administration. Patient-reported outcome measures: use in medical product development to support labeling claims.; 2009.

  2. Basch E, Jia X, Heller G, et al. Adverse symptom event reporting by patients vs clinicians: relationships with clinical outcomes. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2009;101(23):1624–32. https://doi.org/10.1093/jnci/djp386.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  3. EA L, MA S, KB, FS, SK, PK Health care providers underestimate symptom intensities of cancer patients: a multicenter European study. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2010;8. https://doi.org/10.1186/1477-7525-8-104.

  4. Xiao C, Polomano R, Bruner DW. Comparison between patient-reported and clinician-observed symptoms in oncology. Cancer Nurs. 2013;36(6):1–16. https://doi.org/10.1097/NCC.0b013e318269040f.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Basch E, Deal AM, Dueck AC, et al. Overall survival results of a trial assessing patient-reported outcomes for symptom monitoring during routine cancer treatment. JAMA - J Am Med Assoc. 2017;318(2):197–8. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2017.7156.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Velikova G, Booth L, Smith AB, et al. Measuring quality of life in routine oncology practice improves communication and patient well-being: a randomized controlled trial. J Clin Oncol. 2004;22(4):714–24. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2004.06.078.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Kotronoulas G, Kearney N, Maguire R, et al. What is the value of the routine use of patient-reported outcome measures toward improvement of patient outcomes, processes of care, and health service outcomes in cancer care? A systematic review of controlled trials. J Clin Oncol. 2014;32(14):1480–501. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2013.53.5948.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. American Cancer Society. Cancer Treatment & Survivorship Facts & Figures 2019–2021. 2019.

  9. Torre LA, Siegel RL, Ward EM, Jemal A. Global cancer incidence and mortality rates and trends — an update. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2016;25(1):16–27. https://doi.org/10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-15-0578.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Van De Poll-Franse LV, Horevoorts N, Van EM, et al. The patient reported outcomes following initial treatment and long term evaluation of survivorship registry: scope, rationale and design of an infrastructure for the study of physical and psychosocial outcomes in cancer survivorship cohorts. Eur J Cancer. 2011;47(14):2188–94. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejca.2011.04.034.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Foster C, Calman L, Richardson A, May CR, Rogers A, Smith PW. HORIZONS protocol: a UK prospective cohort study to explore recovery of health and well-being in adults diagnosed with cancer. BMJ Open. 2019;9(7):e029662. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2019-029662.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  12. Cuthbert CA, Farragher JF, Hemmelgarn BR, Ding Q, McKinnon GP, Cheung WY. Self-management interventions for cancer survivors: a systematic review and evaluation of intervention content and theories. Psychooncology. 2019. https://doi.org/10.1002/pon.5215.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. KR LHH. Self-management education: history, definition, outcomes, and mechanisms. Ann Behav Med. 2003;26(1):1-7. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15324796ABM2601_01

  14. McCorkle R, Ercolano E, Lazenby M, et al. Self-management: enabling and empowering patients living with cancer as a chronic illness. CA Cancer J Clin. 2011;61(1):50–62. https://doi.org/10.3322/caac.20093.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  15. Alfano CM, Jefford M, Maher J, Birken SA, Mayer DK. Building personalized cancer follow-up care pathways in the United States: lessons learned from implementation in England, Northern Ireland, and Australia. 101200/EDBK_238267 . 2019;(39):625–639.https://doi.org/10.1200/EDBK_238267.

  16. Covidence systematic review software. Internet. https://www.covidence.org/. Accessed 7 Sept 2020.

  17. Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, et al. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. Ann Intern Med. 2009;151(4):264–9. https://doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-151-4-200908180-00135.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. National Collaborating Centre for Methods and Tools. Quality assessment tool for quantitative studies.Eff Public Heal Proj. 1998. https://merst.ca.ephpp/.

  19. Davis KM, Dawson D, Kelly S, et al. Monitoring of health-related quality of life and symptoms in prostate cancer survivors: a randomized trial. J Support Oncol. 2013;11(4):174–82. https://doi.org/10.12788/j.suponc.0013.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Kjaer T, Dalton SO, Andersen E, et al. A controlled study of use of patient-reported outcomes to improve assessment of late effects after treatment for head-and-neck cancer. Radiother Oncol. 2016;119(2):221–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.radonc.2016.04.034.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. van der Hout A, van Uden-Kraan CF, Holtmaat K, et al. Role of eHealth application Oncokompas in supporting self-management of symptoms and health-related quality of life in cancer survivors: a randomised, controlled trial. Lancet Oncol. 2020;21(1):80–94. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1470-2045(19)30675-8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. O’Hea EL, Creamer S, Flahive JM, et al. Survivorship care planning, quality of life, and confidence to transition to survivorship: a randomized controlled trial with women ending treatment for breast cancer. J Psychosoc Oncol. 2021:1–21. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/07347332.2021.1936336.

  23. Vos JAM, Duineveld LAM, Wieldraaijer T, et al. Effect of general practitioner-led versus surgeon-led colon cancer survivorship care, with or without eHealth support, on quality of life (I CARE): an interim analysis of 1-year results of a randomised, controlled trial. Lancet Oncol. 2021;22(8):1175–87. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1470-2045(21)00273-4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Bock M, Moore D, Hwang J, et al. The impact of an electronic health questionnaire on symptom management and behavior reporting for breast cancer survivors. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2012;134(3):1327–35. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-012-2150-1.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Brant JM, Hirschman KB, Keckler SL, Dudley WN, Stricker C. Patient and provider use of electronic care plans generated from patient-reported outcomes. Oncol Nurs Forum. 2019;46(6):715–26. https://doi.org/10.1188/19.ONF.715-726.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Carter J, Raviv L, Appollo K, Baser RE, Iasonos A, Barakat RR. A pilot study using the Gynecologic Cancer Lymphedema Questionnaire (GCLQ) as a clinical care tool to identify lower extremity lymphedema in gynecologic cancer survivors. Gynecol Oncol. 2010;117(2):317–23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ygyno.2010.01.022.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  27. Clarke AL, Roscoe J, Appleton R, et al. Promoting integrated care in prostate cancer through online prostate cancer-specific holistic needs assessment: a feasibility study in primary care. Support Care Cancer. 2020;28(4):1817–27. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-019-04967-y.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Compaci G, Rueter M, Lamy S, et al. Ambulatory Medical Assistance-After Cancer (AMA-AC): a model for an early trajectory survivorship survey of lymphoma patients treated with anthracycline-based chemotherapy. BMC Cancer. 2015;15(1):1–13. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12885-015-1815-7.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Crowley SA, Foley SM, Wittmann D, et al. Sexual health concerns among cancer survivors: testing a novel information-need measure among breast and prostate cancer patients. J Cancer Educ. 2016;31(3):588–94. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13187-015-0865-5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Duman-Lubberding S, van Uden-Kraan CF, Jansen F, et al. Feasibility of an eHealth application “OncoKompas” to improve personalized survivorship cancer care. Support Care Cancer. 2016;24(5):2163–71. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-015-3004-2.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Farnell DJJ, Staffurth J, Sivell S, et al. The ALERT-B questionnaire: a screening tool for the detection of gastroenterological late effects after radiotherapy for prostate cancer. Clin Transl Radiat Oncol. 2020;21:98–103. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ctro.2020.02.002.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  32. Latif H, Graves KD, Kline-Quiroz C, Martone P, Dilawari AA. Associations between patient-reported outcomes and physiatry assessments in an integrative model of a survivorship clinic. J Clin Oncol. 2020;38(15_suppl):e14032–e14032. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2020.38.15_SUPPL.E14032.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Lovrics PJ, Cornacchi SD, Barnabi F, et al. The feasibility and responsiveness of the health utilities index in patients with early-stage breast cancer: a prospective longitudinal study. Qual Life Res. 2008;17(2):333–45.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. McNeill NA, Kors WA, Bosscha MI, et al. Feasibility of RetinoQuest: e-health application to facilitate and improve additional care for retinoblastoma survivors. J Cancer Surviv. 2017;11(6):683–90. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11764-017-0642-z.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  35. Melissant HC, Verdonck-de Leeuw IM, Lissenberg-Witte BI, Konings IR, Cuijpers P, Van Uden-Kraan CF. ‘Oncokompas’, a web-based self-management application to support patient activation and optimal supportive care: a feasibility study among breast cancer survivors. Acta Oncol (Madr). 2018;57(7):924–34. https://doi.org/10.1080/0284186X.2018.1438654.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Palos GR, Gilmore KR, Hutcheson KA, et al. Patterns of self-reported symptom distress among survivors of head and neck cancers. J Clin Oncol. 2020;38(15_suppl):e24073–e24073. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2020.38.15_SUPPL.E24073.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Robert R, Paxton R, Palla S, et al. Feasibility, reliability, and validity of the Pediatric Quality of Life Inventory ™ generic core scales, cancer module, and multidimensional fatigue scale in long-term adult survivors of pediatric cancer. Pediatr Blood Cancer. 2012;59(4):703–7. https://doi.org/10.1002/PBC.24099.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  38. Shah N, Wojcieszynski A, Davis E, et al. Implementing routine patient-reported outcome collection in a large, academic health system. 101200/JCO20203815_suppl7053 . 2020;38(15_suppl):7053–7053.https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2020.38.15_SUPPL.7053.

  39. Thom B, Corcoran S, Lavery JA, Sarpong L, Woodside A, Korenstein D. Predictors of electronic patient-reported outcomes use in the survivorship setting. J Clin Oncol. 2020;38(15_suppl):e14038-e14038. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2020.38.15_SUPPL.E14038.

  40. Yang EJ, Kim BR, Shin HI, Lim JY. Use of the international classification of functioning, disability and health as a functional assessment tool for breast cancer survivors. J Breast Cancer. 2012;15(1):43–50. https://doi.org/10.4048/jbc.2012.15.1.43.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  41. Agarwal V, Corsini N, Eckert MC, et al. A pilot study of population-based, patient-reported outcome collection in cancer survivors. Support Care Cancer. 2021;29(8):4239–47. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-020-05910-2.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Gerstl B, Signorelli C, Wakefield CE, et al. Feasibility, acceptability and appropriateness of a reproductive patient reported outcome measure for cancer survivors. Mordaunt DA, ed. PLoS One. 2021;16(8):e0256497. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0256497

  43. McDonough AL, Lei Y, Kwak AH, et al. Implementation of a Brief Screening Tool to Identify Needs of Breast Cancer Survivors. Clin Breast Cancer. 2021;21(1):e88–95. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clbc.2020.07.006.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Palos GR, Suarez-Almazor ME. Launching an electronic patient-reported outcomes initiative in real-time clinical practice. J Natl Cancer Inst - Monogr. 2021;2021(57):23–30. https://doi.org/10.1093/jncimonographs/lgab005.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Stan DL, Inselman JW, Ridgeway JL, et al. Pilot implementation to assess the feasibility and care team impact of an app-based interactive care plan to remotely monitor breast cancer survivors. J Cancer Surviv. 2022;16(1):13–23. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11764-021-01136-1.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  46. Teckie S, Solomon J, Kadapa K, et al. A mobile patient-facing app for tracking patient-reported outcomes in head and neck cancer survivors: single-arm feasibility study. JMIR Form Res. 2021;5(3):e24667. https://doi.org/10.2196/24667.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  47. Fisher AP, Wortman K, Kinahan K, et al. Piloting a survivorship screening tool in a specialty clinic for survivors of childhood cancers. J Adolesc Young Adult Oncol. 2020;00(00):7–10. https://doi.org/10.1089/jayao.2019.0079.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. van der Hout A, Jansen F, van Uden-Kraan CF, et al. Cost-utility of an eHealth application “Oncokompas” that supports cancer survivors in self-management: results of a randomised controlled trial. J Cancer Surviv. 2021;15(1):77–86. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11764-020-00912-9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Bangor A, Kortum PT, Miller JT. An Empirical Evaluation of the System Usability Scale. Int J Hum Comput Interact. 2008;24(6):574–94. https://doi.org/10.1080/10447310802205776.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Rademakers J, Nijman J, van der Hoek L, Heijmans M, Rijken M. Measuring patient activation in The Netherlands: translation and validation of the American short form Patient Activation Measure (PAM13). BMC Publ Health. 2012;12(1). doi:https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2458-12-577.

  51. Ramsey I, Ramsey I. A core set of patient-reported outcomes for population-based cancer survivorship research: a consensus study effects related to the disease and treatment can have. J Cancer Surviv. 2020.

  52. CM R, T A, A J, et al. Effects of an internet support system to assist cancer patients in reducing symptom distress: a randomized controlled trial. Cancer Nurs. 2013;36(1):6–17. https://doi.org/10.1097/NCC.0B013E31824D90D4.

  53. Arts LPJ, Oerlemans S, Posthuma EFM, et al. Web-based self-management for patients with lymphoma: assessment of the reach of intervention of a randomized controlled trial. J Med Internet Res. 2020;22(5). https://doi.org/10.2196/17018.

  54. Girgis A, Ivana D, Arnold A, et al. Web-Based patient-reported outcome measures for personalized treatment and care (PROMPT-Care): multicenter pragmatic nonrandomized trial. J Med Internet Res. 2020;22(10):e19685. https://doi.org/10.2196/19685.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  55. Berry DL, Blumenstein BA, Halpenny B, et al. Enhancing patient-provider communication with the electronic self-report assessment for cancer: a randomized trial. 101200/JCO2010303909. 2011;29(8):1029–1035.https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2010.30.3909

  56. Snyder CF, Aaronson NK, Choucair AK, et al. Implementing patient-reported outcomes assessment in clinical practice: a review of the options and considerations. Qual Life Res. 2012;21(8):1305–14. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-011-0054-x.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Basch E. Patient-reported outcomes — harnessing patients’ voices to improve clinical care. N Engl J Med. 2017;376(2):105–8. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMP1611252.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Halpern M, Viswanathan M, Evans T. Models of cancer survivorship care: overview and summary of current evidence. J Oncol Pract. 2011;11(1):e19–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  59. Rubinstein EB, Miller WL, Hudson SV, et al. Cancer survivorship care in advanced primary care practices: a qualitative study of challenges and opportunities. JAMA Intern Med. 2017;177(12):1726–32. https://doi.org/10.1001/JAMAINTERNMED.2017.4747.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  60. R M, E E, M L, et al. Self-management: Enabling and empowering patients living with cancer as a chronic illness. CA Cancer J Clin. 2011;61(1):50–62. https://doi.org/10.3322/CAAC.20093.

  61. Mejdahl CT, Schougaard LMV, Hjollund NH, Riiskjær E, Thorne S, Lomborg K. PRO-based follow-up as a means of self-management support — an interpretive description of the patient perspective. J Patient-Reported Outcomes. 2018;2. https://doi.org/10.1186/S41687-018-0067-0.

  62. Basch E, Barbera L, Kerrigan CL, Velikova G. Implementation of patient-reported outcomes in routine medical care. Am Soc Clin Oncol Educ B. 2018;38:122–34. https://doi.org/10.1200/EDBK_200383.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  63. Aaronson N, Choucair A, Elliott T. User’s guide to implementing patient-reported outcomes assessment in clinical practice. IntSoc Qual Life Res. 2015;(January):57. http://www.isoqol.org/UserFiles/file/UsersGuide.pdf.

  64. TH C, L L, MM K. A systematic review: how to choose appropriate health-related quality of life (HRQOL) measures in routine general practice? J Zhejiang Univ Sci B. 2005;6(9):936–940. https://doi.org/10.1631/JZUS.2005.B0936

  65. Ossowski S, Kammerer A, Stram D, Piazza-DeLap L, Basch E, Katzel JA. Patient-reported outcomes integrated within an electronic medical record in patients with head and neck cancer. JCO Clin Cancer Informatics. 2021;5:842–8. https://doi.org/10.1200/cci.21.00058.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  66. Hamilton SN, Tran E, Ho C, et al. Patient-reported outcome measures in patients undergoing radiotherapy for head and neck cancer. Support Care Cancer 2020 295. 2020;29(5):2537–2547. https://doi.org/10.1007/S00520-020-05778-2.

  67. van der Hout A, Holtmaat K, Jansen F, et al. The eHealth self-management application “Oncokompas” that supports cancer survivors to improve health-related quality of life and reduce symptoms: which groups benefit most? Acta Oncol. 2021;60(4):403–11. https://doi.org/10.1080/0284186X.2020.1851764.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  68. Nielsen LK, King M, Möller S, et al. Strategies to improve patient-reported outcome completion rates in longitudinal studies. Qual Life Res 2019 292. 2019;29(2):335–346. https://doi.org/10.1007/S11136-019-02304-8.

  69. Nguyen H, Butow P, Dhillon H, Sundaresan P. A review of the barriers to using patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in routine cancer care. J Med Radiat Sci. 2021;68(2):186–95. https://doi.org/10.1002/jmrs.421.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  70. van der Hout A, van Uden-Kraan CF, Holtmaat K, et al. Reasons for not reaching or using web-based self-management applications, and the use and evaluation of Oncokompas among cancer survivors, in the context of a randomised controlled trial. Internet Interv. 2021;25:100429. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.invent.2021.100429.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  71. Mazariego C, Jefford M, Chan RJ, et al. Priority recommendations for the implementation of patient-reported outcomes in clinical cancer care: a Delphi study. J Cancer Surviv. 2022;16(1):33–43. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11764-021-01135-2.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  72. E B, SL P, AC D, et al. Feasibility of patient reporting of symptomatic adverse events via the patient-reported outcomes version of the common terminology criteria for adverse events (PRO-CTCAE) in a chemoradiotherapy cooperative group multicenter clinical trial. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2017;98(2):409–418. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.IJROBP.2017.02.002

  73. Ware J, Sherbourne C. The MOS 36-item short-form health survey (SF-36). I. Conceptual framework and item selection - PubMed. Med Care. 1992;30(6):473–483.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Medicine, Division of Medical Oncology, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA

    Surbhi Singhal, James Dickerson, Mohana Roy & Lidia Schapira

  2. Department of Medicine, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA

    Michael J. Glover, Michelle Chiu, Timothy Ellis-Caleo & Gavin Hui

  3. Pravan Health Care, San Juan, PR, USA

    Carla Tamayo

  4. Department of Mental Health Law and Policy, University of South Florida, Tampa, FL, USA

    Nele Loecher

  5. Lane Medical Library & Knowledge Management Center, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA, USA

    Hong-nei Wong

  6. Health Psychology Section, Department of Psychology, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology, and Neuroscience, King’s College London, London, UK

    Lauren C. Heathcote

Authors
  1. Surbhi Singhal
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. James Dickerson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Michael J. Glover
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Mohana Roy
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Michelle Chiu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Timothy Ellis-Caleo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Gavin Hui
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Carla Tamayo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Nele Loecher
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. Hong-nei Wong
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  11. Lauren C. Heathcote
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  12. Lidia Schapira
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

All authors contributed to this study. All authors read and approved the final manuscript. Conceptualization: S. S., M. R., L. C. H., L. S. Acquisition of data: H. W. Analysis and interpretation of data: S. S., J. D., M. G., M. R., M. C., T. E., G. H., C. T., N. L., L. C. H., L. S. Preparation of manuscript: S. S., J. D., M. G., M. R., M. C., T. E., G. H., C. T., N. L., H. W., L. C. H., L. S.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Surbhi Singhal.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors have no conflicts of interest to report.

Additional information

Publisher's note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary file1 (DOCX 16 KB)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Singhal, S., Dickerson, J., Glover, M.J. et al. Patient-reported outcome measurement implementation in cancer survivors: a systematic review. J Cancer Surviv 18, 223–244 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11764-022-01216-w

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11764-022-01216-w

Keywords

Search

Navigation