Enhancing representativeness of patient-reported outcomes in routine radiation oncology care: a quality improvement protocol to address non-response.

Abstract

Non-response significantly undermines the representativeness of patient-reported outcome (PRO) data, thereby compromising its utility for facilitating high-value, equitable, patient-centred care in cancer clinics. Quality improvement studies are needed to assess the representativeness of PRO data collected in routine care, identify the underlying causes of non-response and develop novel methods to ensure data representativeness. Using a multilevel framework and a mixed-methods approach, we have three aims: (1) characterise the non-response of the Global-10 across clinic, provider and patient levels; (2) identify multilevel causes of non-response and potential strategies to improve representativeness in PRO collection; and (3) develop effective modifications to missing-data methods to enhance the representativeness of pre-existing PRO data. Our primary data source is the Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Global-10, collected as part of routine care at the Radiation Oncology clinics within the Mass General Brigham (MGB) healthcare system. Other sources include (1) Harvard Catalyst for provider-specific data, (2) MGB administrative data, (3) public Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services data and (4) the National Plan and Provider Enumeration System. We will conduct quantitative analyses to assess variations in Global-10 non-response across multilevel factors. Additionally, we will use qualitative interviews with patients and clinical professionals to understand the causes of non-response and to formulate strategies to expand the reach of PRO collection to underrepresented cancer patients, improve their completions and enhance overall data representativeness. Finally, we will integrate implementation science knowledge and findings from the first two aims into missing-data methods to manage non-response in the pre-existing Global-10 data and to evaluate their performance in preserving representativeness. The study protocol was reviewed and approved by the Institutional Review Board at the Dana-Farber/Harvard Cancer Center (24-225). Written informed consent will be obtained from participants. Study findings will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications and presentations at national and international conferences.