Systematic Review of Patient-Reported Outcomes in MS Care

A systematic review analyzed 21 articles on patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in multiple sclerosis (MS) care. Commonly assessed areas included health-related quality of life, depression, and fatigue. Most data was collected electronically, but integration with electronic health records was low. Although 48% of studies reported changes at the system level, only 29% demonstrated direct clinical actions based on PRO data.

Tags: #Other
Most relevant to: —
Source: Read original source (PMID 42806857)

This plain-English summary was written by AI from a published abstract and may contain errors. It is not medical advice. Read the original study and talk to your MS team before making decisions about treatment.

Why it matters

This review highlights the prevalence of certain health domains in MS care and the reliance on electronic data collection, yet reveals gaps in effective integration and action based on patient-reported outcomes. Understanding these aspects is crucial for improving MS patient management and informing future clinical practices.

What this does not prove

The review indicates that literature on PROs in MS care is limited, with no clear consensus on their uses or purposes, making it difficult to draw definitive conclusions.

Next milestone

No next milestone was established from the available source.

Study facts

Study design: Systematic review
Participants / samples: 21 · basis not reported
Randomised: Not reported
Controlled: Not reported
Primary endpoint met: Not reported
Relevant MS type: All
Publication date: 2026-09-29
Evidence reviewed: Abstract only
Regulatory approval: Not reported
Research areas: Other

Original sources

Primary evidenceUse of patient reported outcomes in multiple sclerosis clinical management: Scoping literature review. ↗DOI: 10.1177/13524585261481124

Supporting passages (12)

study designScoping review of studies reporting PRO use in MS clinical practice (January 2012-June 2025) across seven electronic databases.

subjects21 articles (10 countries; 43 instruments) met review criteria.

sample sizeOf 6797 records screened, 21 articles (10 countries; 43 instruments) met review criteria.

research categoriesScoping literature review.

relevant ms typesNo consistent uses and purposes were found.

findingsFrequently assessed domains were health-related quality of life (48%), depression (43%), and fatigue (29%).

findingsElectronic collection predominated (57%), yet only 38% integrated PROs with electronic health records (EHRs).

findingsPurposes included program evaluation (33%), secondary analysis (24%), collection methods (19%), and quality improvement (14%).

findingsWhile 48% reported process or system-level changes, only 29% documented clinical actions triggered by PRO data.

limitationsArticles on PROs in MS care are sparse.

limitationsNo consistent uses and purposes were found.

publication datePublication date: 2026-09-29

AI assessment, not yet reviewed by a person · version 1 · Community votes are separate from evidence review.