Skip to main content

Table 2 Selection criteria

From: Healthcare provider characteristics that influence the implementation of individual-level patient-centered outcome measure (PROM) and patient-reported experience measure (PREM) data across practice settings: a protocol for a mixed methods systematic review with a narrative synthesis

Topic

Inclusion

Exclusion

Population (P)

• Healthcare providers

• Decision-makers exclusively

• Patients exclusively

Phenomena of interest (I)

Studies about PREMs or PROMs and

• experiences of applying or implementing

• methods or strategies for integrating and interpreting (e.g., processes, logistics, tools, or workflow)

• factors (barriers and facilitator) influencing implementation

• views or attitudes toward their use

Studies about PREMs or PROMs and

• impact or effectiveness

• mechanisms by which they work (e.g., patient-provider communication)

• ways used (e.g., screening, assessment, improve communication)

• measurement development, testing, and selection

• suitability for specific patient populations

• a focus solely on patient-centered care

Context (C)

Studies concerning data at the individual (micro) level with patients:

• routine clinical care

• point-of care

• everyday clinical practice

• directly inform patient care or care planning

• clinical decision-making

• real-world application

Studies concerning aggregated data for purposes such as:

• performance indicators or accreditation

• value-based medicine

• quality improvement or quality control

• resource allocation, service provision, and economic evaluation

• clinical registries

• reimbursement and payer issues

• benchmarking

• drug development

Study design

Published scholarly work including research, pilot or feasibility projects, evidence-based implementation/quality improvement, systematic reviews, literature reviews, and expert opinion

Published literature such as editorials, opinion or position papers, commentary, study protocols, conference proceedings or abstracts, and theory.

Insufficient information reported on study design