ArticleJournal of medical Internet research2015
An eHealth Application in Head and Neck Cancer Survivorship Care: Health Care Professionals' Perspectives.
Article in Journal of medical Internet research, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 32 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
32 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 60 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effectiveness of Home-Based Telerehabilitation Interventions for Dysphagia in Patients With Head and Neck Cancer: Systematic Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2023Pooled it
- Health information technology to support cancer survivorship care planning: A systematic review.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2021Pooled it
- Electronic Patient-Reported Outcome-Based Interventions for Palliative Cancer Care: A Systematic and Mapping Review.JCO clinical cancer informatics · 2020Pooled it
- Measuring health-related quality of life in colorectal cancer patients: systematic review of measurement properties of the EORTC QLQ-CR29.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2019Pooled it
- Factors Determining the Success and Failure of eHealth Interventions: Systematic Review of the Literature.Journal of medical Internet research · 2018Pooled it
- Cost-utility of an eHealth application 'Oncokompas' that supports cancer survivors in self-management: results of a randomised controlled trial.Journal of cancer survivorship : research and practice · 2021Trial
- Adoption and implementation of a web-based self-management application "Oncokompas" in routine cancer care: a national pilot study.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2019Trial
- Trial
- Experiences of mHealth use in head and neck cancer care: a thematic synthesis guided by the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2026Review
- Long-term outcomes among individuals living with and beyond head and neck cancer: a scoping review.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2026Article
- Usability and Usefulness of a Symptom Management Coaching System for Patients With Cancer Treated With Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors: Comparative Mixed Methods Study.JMIR formative research · 2025Article
- Digital Psychosocial Follow-up for Childhood Critical Illness Survivors: A Qualitative Interview Study on Health Professionals' Perspectives.Scandinavian journal of child and adolescent psychiatry and psychology · 2024Article
- Assessing Patient-Reported Outcomes in Routine Cancer Clinical Care Using Electronic Administration and Telehealth Technologies: Realist Synthesis of Potential Mechanisms for Improving Health Outcomes.Journal of medical Internet research · 2023Review
- Cause of Death in Patients with Oropharyngeal Carcinoma by Human Papillomavirus Status: Comparative Data Analysis.JMIR public health and surveillance · 2023Article
- Perceived Barriers and Facilitators in Using Patient-Reported Outcome Systems for Cancer Care: Systematic Mapping Study.JMIR cancer · 2023Review
- Web-Based Patient-Reported Outcomes for ENT Patients-Evaluation of the Status Quo, Patients' View, and Future Perspectives.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- eHealth Interventions for Dutch Cancer Care: Systematic Review Using the Triple Aim Lens.JMIR cancer · 2022Review
- Methods for Human-Centered eHealth Development: Narrative Scoping Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2022Article
- Identifying unmet needs and limitations in physical health in survivors of Head and Neck Cancer.European journal of cancer care · 2021Article
- Digital health for optimal supportive care in oncology: benefits, limits, and future perspectives.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundAlthough many cancer survivors could benefit from supportive care, they often do not utilize such services. Previous studies have shown that patient-reported outcomes (PROs) could be a solution to meet cancer survivors' needs, for example through an eHealth application that monitors quality of life and provides personalized advice and supportive care options. In order to develop an effective application that can successfully be implemented in current health care, it is important to include health care professionals in the development process.
objectiveThe aim of this study was to investigate health care professionals' perspectives toward follow-up care and an eHealth application, OncoKompas, in follow-up cancer care that monitors quality of life via PROs, followed by automatically generated tailored feedback and personalized advice on supportive care.
methodsHealth care professionals involved in head and neck cancer care (N=11) were interviewed on current follow-up care and the anticipated value of the proposed eHealth application (Step 1). A prototype of the eHealth application, OncoKompas, was developed (Step 2). Cognitive walkthroughs were conducted among health care professionals (N=21) to investigate perceived usability (Step 3). Interviews were recorded, transcribed verbatim, and analyzed by 2 coders.
resultsHealth care professionals indicated several barriers in current follow-up care including difficulties in detecting symptoms, patients' perceived need for supportive care, and a lack of time to encourage survivors to obtain supportive care. Health care professionals expected the eHealth application to be of added value. The cognitive walkthroughs demonstrated that health care professionals emphasized the importance of tailoring care. They considered the navigation structure of OncoKompas to be complex. Health care professionals differed in their opinion toward the best strategy to implement the application in clinical practice but indicated that it should be incorporated in the HNC cancer care pathway to ensure all survivors would benefit.
conclusionsHealth care professionals experienced several barriers in directing patients to supportive care. They were positive toward the development and implementation of an eHealth application and expected it could support survivors in obtaining supportive care tailored to their needs. The cognitive walkthroughs revealed several points for optimizing the application prototype and developing an efficient implementation strategy. Including health care professionals in an early phase of a participatory design approach is valuable in developing an eHealth application and an implementation strategy meeting stakeholders' needs.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.