MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415098161 · doi:10.2196/83149

Patient Preferences for Technology-Assisted Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement of Mental Health Symptoms Among Veterans: Cross-Sectional Survey

2025· article· en· W4415098161 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Bella Etingen, Eric Richardson, Stephanie L. Shimada, Jennifer A. Palmer, Ndindam Ndiwane, Robin T. Higashi, Felicia R Bixler, Bridget Smith, Terry J. Newton, Timothy P. Hogan

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Participatory Medicine · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealthcare Operations and Scheduling Optimization
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPromHealth careSocioeconomic statusMental healthData collectionAdministration (probate law)Ethnic group

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The Veterans Health Administration is promoting patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) collection for measurement-based mental health care. Understanding veteran preferences about how and when to complete PROMs is critical to support their implementation. OBJECTIVE: We examined veteran preferences for timing and use of different technology platforms to complete mental health-related PROMs. METHODS: We invited a national sample of 1373 veterans to complete a survey; 858 (62.5%) responded. Surveys asked about veteran preferences for how and when to complete mental health-related PROMs. We characterized responses using descriptive statistics and estimated multiple logistic regression models to examine associations between veteran demographic and health characteristics and preferences for completing PROMs. RESULTS: Most veterans preferred completing PROMs between appointments (607/801, 75.8%) using features of a patient portal (410/801, 51.2%), during appointments (589/801, 73.5%) verbally (413/801, 51.6%), and while at the medical center (480/801, 59.9%) on paper (189/801, 23.6%) or a tablet computer (180/801, 22.5%). Hispanic (vs non-Hispanic) veterans had 3.32 (95% CI 1.04-10.58) times higher odds of preferring to complete PROMs at the medical center, and veterans with lower (vs higher) socioeconomic status had lower odds (odds ratio 0.61, 95% CI 0.40-0.93) of preferring to complete PROMs in between appointments but 1.97 (95% CI 1.23-3.16) times higher odds of preferring to complete PROMs during appointments. CONCLUSIONS: As the Veterans Health Administration and other health care systems seek to expand the integration of PROM data into health care services, adaptive and flexible approaches to PROM administration that align with patient preferences, including those that leverage technology platforms in the remote collection of these data, may bolster implementation. Our results indicate that such implementation efforts should consider patient ethnicity and socioeconomic status. Our findings further suggest that these efforts could benefit from incorporating PROM administration into online patient portals, developing mobile health apps that support PROM completion through patients' personal devices in between clinical encounters, and engaging care team members in PROM administration during appointments.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.471

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.266
GPT teacher head0.495
Teacher spread0.230 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Participatory MedicineSame topicHealthcare Operations and Scheduling OptimizationFrench-language works237,207