ArticleSupportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer2019
Usability of an online application for reporting the burden of side effects in cancer patients.
Article in Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 2 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 24 citations in OpenAlex.
- Empowering citizens to spontaneously report suspected adverse drug reaction: Systematic literature review of interventions and their impact.British journal of clinical pharmacology · 2026Pooled it
- Experiences of Patients With Cancer Using Electronic Symptom Management Systems: Qualitative Systematic Review and Meta-Synthesis.Journal of medical Internet research · 2024Pooled it
- Digital symptom monitoring in cancer care: an exploratory evaluation of low uptake and engagement.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2026Article
- Patient-reported outcomes in cancer survivorship: insights from two decades of population-based PROFILES registry research.Journal of cancer survivorship : research and practice · 2026Review
- Patient-reported symptom monitoring: using (big) data to improve supportive care at the macro-, meso-, and micro-levels.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2024Article
- Implementation of electronic prospective surveillance models in cancer care: a scoping review.Implementation science : IS · 2023Article
- Essential barriers and considerations for the implementation of electronic patient-reported outcome (ePRO) measures in oncological practice: contextualizing the results of a feasibility study with existing literature.Zeitschrift fur Gesundheitswissenschaften = Journal of public health · 2022Article
- A Narrative Review on the Collection and Use of Electronic Patient-Reported Outcomes in Cancer Survivorship Care with Emphasis on Symptom Monitoring.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2022Review
- eHealth Interventions for Dutch Cancer Care: Systematic Review Using the Triple Aim Lens.JMIR cancer · 2022Review
- Brazilian Red Propolis: Extracts Production, Physicochemical Characterization, and Cytotoxicity Profile for Antitumor Activity.Biomolecules · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeIn the Netherlands, online patient reporting of side effects is a new phenomenon. The aim of this study was to gain insight into patients' user experiences and the benefits of the web application BijKanker ('AlongsideCancer').
methodsPatients in seven hospitals were asked to make entries in BijKanker at least once a week. On logging in to the application for the first time (T1), patients were asked to complete a questionnaire on information needs and Internet use. Four months after starting their treatment (T2), they were asked to complete a second questionnaire on their experiences with BijKanker and its four functions: information; reporting side effects; communication with oncology nurses and clinicians; and data feedback.
resultsNinety-nine patients logged in to BijKanker, 60 patients (61%) had completed the first questionnaire (T1) and 40 (40%) had also completed the second questionnaire (T2). In total, 1661 side effects were reported. Generally, patients experienced BijKanker as user-friendly and patients appreciated the attention given to their side effects.
conclusionsThe user-centred design gives ample insight into user experiences and usability. The results provide useful starting points for improvements to the online application. We recommend to put much effort into supporting oncology nurses in the implementation of the application.
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.