Reliability and Validity Issues Related to Interactive Tailored Patient Assessments: A Case Study

Journals

1. Phillips N, Street M, Haesler E. A systematic review of reliable and valid tools for the measurement of patient participation in healthcare. BMJ Quality & Safety 2016;25(2):110 View
2. Heyn L, Finset A, Eide H, Ruland C. Effects of an interactive tailored patient assessment on patient–clinician communication in cancer care. Psycho-Oncology 2013;22(1):89 View
3. Børøsund E, Ruland C, Moore S, Ekstedt M. Nurses’ experiences of using an interactive tailored patient assessment tool one year past implementation. International Journal of Medical Informatics 2014;83(7):e23 View
4. Heyn L, Finset A, Ruland C. Talking About Feelings and Worries in Cancer Consultations. Cancer Nursing 2013;36(2):E20 View
5. Ruland C, Holte H, Roislien J, Heaven C, Hamilton G, Kristiansen J, Sandbaek H, Kvaloy S, Hasund L, Ellison M. Effects of a computer-supported interactive tailored patient assessment tool on patient care, symptom distress, and patients' need for symptom management support: a randomized clinical trial. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association 2010;17(4):403 View
6. Heyn L, Ruland C, Finset A. Effects of an interactive tailored patient assessment tool on eliciting and responding to cancer patients’ cues and concerns in clinical consultations with physicians and nurses. Patient Education and Counseling 2012;86(2):158 View
7. Li M, Macedo A, Crawford S, Bagha S, Leung Y, Zimmermann C, Fitzgerald B, Wyatt M, Stuart-McEwan T, Rodin G. Easier Said Than Done: Keys to Successful Implementation of the Distress Assessment and Response Tool (DART) Program. Journal of Oncology Practice 2016;12(5):e513 View
8. Wickramasekera N, Taylor S, Lumley E, Gray T, Wilson E, Radley S. Can electronic assessment tools improve the process of shared decision-making? A systematic review. Health Information Management Journal 2023;52(2):72 View