Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31012855›Full record

SynthesisJournal of medical Internet research2019

The Use of Cancer-Specific Patient-Centered Technologies Among Underserved Populations in the United States: Systematic Review.

Will L Tarver, David A Haggstrom

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Journal of medical Internet research, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 42 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
42citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
11.1field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
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

42 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 72 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. An exploratory study to understand how rurality status and demographic characteristics are associated with enrollment, engagement, and retention in a digital health intervention targeting the Appalachian region.The Journal of rural health : official journal of the American Rural Health Association and the National Rural Health Care Association · 2025
    Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Who Enrolls in an Online Cancer Survivorship Program? Reach of the INSPIRE Randomized Controlled Trial for Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation Survivors.Biology of blood and marrow transplantation : journal of the American Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation · 2020
    Trial
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Gaps in care, support, and research among diverse patients with early onset cancers.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2025
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
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

2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Will L Tarver *VA Health Services Research and Development, Center for Health Information & Communication, Richard L Roudebush VA Medical Center, Indianapolis, IN, United States.ORCID 0000-0001-7667-5758
David A HaggstromVA Health Services Research and Development, Center for Health Information & Communication, Richard L Roudebush VA Medical Center, Indianapolis, IN, United States.ORCID 0000-0003-3637-6950
Health Services Research & Development · USRegenstrief Institute · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn the United States, more than 1.6 million new cases of cancer are estimated to be diagnosed each year. However, the burden of cancer among the US population is not shared equally, with racial and ethnic minorities and lower-income populations having a higher cancer burden compared with their counterparts. For example, African Americans have the highest mortality rates and shortest survival rates for most cancers compared with other racial or ethnic groups in the United States. A wide range of technologies (eg, internet-based [electronic health, eHealth] technologies, mobile [mobile health, mHealth] apps, and telemedicine) available to patients are designed to improve their access to care and empower them to participate actively in their care, providing a means to reduce health care disparities; however, little is known of their use among underserved populations.

objectiveThe aim of this study was to systematically review the current evidence on the use of cancer-specific patient-centered technologies among various underserved populations.

methodsComputer-based search was conducted in the following academic databases: (1) PubMed (cancer subset), (2) MEDLINE, (3) PsycINFO, and (4) CINAHL. We included studies that were peer-reviewed, published in the English language, and conducted in the United States. Each study was individually assessed for relevance, with any disagreements being reconciled by consensus. We used a 3-step inclusion process in which we examined study titles, abstracts, and full-text papers for assessment of inclusion criteria. We systematically extracted information from each paper meeting our inclusion criteria.

resultsThis review includes 71 papers that use patient-centered technologies that primarily targeted African Americans (n=31), rural populations (n=14), and Hispanics (n=12). A majority of studies used eHealth technologies (n=41) finding them to be leading sources of cancer-related health information and significantly improving outcomes such as screening among nonadherent individuals and increasing knowledge about cancer and cancer screening. Studies on mHealth found that participants reported overall favorable responses to receiving health information via short message service (SMS) text message; however, challenges were experienced with respect to lack of knowledge of how to text among some participants. More complex mobile technologies (eg, a tablet-based risk assessment tool) were also found favorable to use and acceptable among underserved populations; however, they also resulted in more significant barriers, for example, participants expressed concerns regarding security and unfamiliarity with the technology and preferred further instruction and assistance in its use.

conclusionsThere is a growing body of literature exploring patient-centered technology and its influence on care of underserved populations. In this review, we find that these technologies seem to be effective, especially when tailored, in improving patient and care-related outcomes. Despite the potential of patient-centered technologies and the receptivity of underserved populations, challenges still exist with respect to their effective use and usability.

Indexed as

Medically Underserved AreaHumansMass ScreeningNeoplasmsPatient-Centered CareTechnologyTelemedicineUnited StatesVulnerable Populationscancermedical informaticsunderserved populations

Identifiers

PMID31012855
PMCPMC6658273
OpenAlexW2890389880

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.