Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30552082›Full record

ReviewJMIR mHealth and uHealth2018

Use of Mobile Devices to Help Cancer Patients Meet Their Information Needs in Non-Inpatient Settings: Systematic Review.

Rebecca Richards, Paul Kinnersley, Kate Brain, Grace McCutchan, John Staffurth, Fiona Wood

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in JMIR mHealth and uHealth, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 36 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
36citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

36 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Supporting colorectal cancer survivors using eHealth: a systematic review and framework suggestion.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2020
    Pooled it
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Quality of life in the digital age: young adult hematopoietic stem cell transplantation patients and healthcare providers' views of telehealth.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2024
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Race Differences in Patient-Reported Symptoms during Chemotherapy among Women with Early-Stage Hormone Receptor-Positive Breast Cancer.Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2023
    Observational
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Rebecca RichardsDivision of Population Medicine, Cardiff University, Cardiff, United Kingdom.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7122-6822
Paul KinnersleyCentre for Medical Education, Cardiff University, Cardiff, United Kingdom.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5156-3370
Kate BrainDivision of Population Medicine, Cardiff University, Cardiff, United Kingdom.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9296-9748
Grace McCutchanDivision of Population Medicine, Cardiff University, Cardiff, United Kingdom.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8079-2540
John StaffurthSection of Oncology, Palliative Care Medicine, Cardiff University, Cardiff, United Kingdom.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7834-3172
Fiona WoodDivision of Population Medicine, Cardiff University, Cardiff, United Kingdom.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7397-4074

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe shift from inpatient to outpatient cancer care means that patients are now required to manage their condition at home, away from regular supervision by clinicians. Subsequently, research has consistently reported that many patients with cancer have unmet information needs during their illness. Mobile devices, such as mobile phones and tablet computers, provide an opportunity to deliver information to patients remotely. To date, no systematic reviews have evaluated how mobile devices have been used specifically to help patients meet to their information needs.

objectiveA systematic review was conducted to identify studies that describe the use of mobile interventions to enable patients with cancer meet their cancer-related information needs in non-inpatient settings, and to describe the effects and feasibility of these interventions.

methodsMEDLINE, Embase, and PsycINFO databases were searched up until January 2017. Search terms related to "mobile devices," "information needs," and "cancer" were used. There were no restrictions on study type in order to be as inclusive as possible. Study participants were patients with cancer undergoing treatment. Interventions had to be delivered by a mobile or handheld device, attempt to meet patients' cancer-related information needs, and be for use in non-inpatient settings. Critical Appraisal Skills Programme checklists were used to assess the methodological quality of included studies. A narrative synthesis was performed and findings were organized by common themes found across studies.

resultsThe initial search yielded 1020 results. We included 23 articles describing 20 studies. Interventions aimed to improve the monitoring and management of treatment-related symptoms (17/20, 85%), directly increase patients' knowledge related to their condition (2/20, 10%), and improve communication of symptoms to clinicians in consultations (1/20, 5%). Studies focused on adult (17/20; age range 24-87 years) and adolescent (3/20; age range 8-18 years) patients. Sample sizes ranged from 4-125, with 13 studies having 25 participants or fewer. Most studies were conducted in the United Kingdom (12/20, 52%) or United States (7/20, 30%). Of the 23 articles included, 12 were of medium quality, 9 of poor quality, and 2 of good quality. Overall, interventions were reported to be acceptable and perceived as useful and easy to use. Few technical problems were encountered. Adherence was generally consistent and high (periods ranged from 5 days to 6 months). However, there was considerable variation in use of intervention components within and between studies. Reported benefits of the interventions included improved symptom management, patient empowerment, and improved clinician-patient communication, although mixed findings were reported for patients' health-related quality of life and anxiety.

conclusionsThe current review highlighted that mobile interventions for patients with cancer are only meeting treatment or symptom-related information needs. There were no interventions designed to meet patients' full range of cancer-related information needs, from information on psychological support to how to manage finances during cancer, and the long-term effects of treatment. More comprehensive interventions are required for patients to meet their information needs when managing their condition in non-inpatient settings. Controlled evaluations are needed to further determine the effectiveness of these types of intervention.

Indexed as

cancercell phonecomputers, handheldconsumer health informationinformation disseminationneoplasmspatientssmartphone

Identifiers

PMID30552082
PMCPMC6315262

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.