ArticleJMIR mHealth and uHealth2019
Mobile Health Divide Between Clinicians and Patients in Cancer Care: Results From a Cross-Sectional International Survey.
Article in JMIR mHealth and uHealth, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 3 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
23 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 40 citations in OpenAlex.
- Understanding Inequalities in Mobile Health Utilization Across Phases: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Pooled it
- Smartphone Apps for Pulmonary Hypertension: Systematic Search and Content Evaluation.JMIR mHealth and uHealth · 2024Pooled it
- Smartphone Apps for Patients With Hematologic Malignancies: Systematic Review and Evaluation of Content.JMIR mHealth and uHealth · 2022Pooled it
- Use and Influencing Factors of mHealth Services Among Adult Survivors of Cancer: Cross-Sectional Survey Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Technology Access and Preferences for Smartphone App Interventions to Optimize Iron Chelation Therapy Adherence Among Adolescents, Young Adults, and Parents of Children Receiving Chronic Transfusions: Cross-Sectional Survey Study.JMIR pediatrics and parenting · 2026Article
- Mobile Health App Attitudes and Adoption Among Oncology Providers: Cross-Sectional National Survey.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Facilitators and Barriers to Implementing Mobile Mental Health Interventions: Qualitative Study of the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research in Pediatric Oncology Providers.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Mobile Apps for Oncology Health Care Professionals: Mapping and Assessment Study.JMIR mHealth and uHealth · 2026Article
- What is needed for improved uptake and adoption of digital aftercare programs by cancer survivors: a mixed methods study applying the COM-B model.Journal of cancer survivorship : research and practice · 2026Article
- Usability Evaluation of the Karafs Application: A Qualitative Study Using the Think-Aloud Method.Health science reports · 2026Article
- Health-Related Internet Use Among Outpatients Undergoing Cancer Treatment During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Cross-Sectional Survey Study.JMIR human factors · 2025Article
- Implementing Smartphone-Based Telemedicine for Cervical Cancer Screening in Uganda: Qualitative Study of Stakeholders' Perceptions.Journal of medical Internet research · 2023Article
- Joining telehealth in rheumatology: a survey on the role played by personalized experience from patients' perspective.BMC health services research · 2023Article
- Article
- Factors Associated With Self-reported Use of Web and Mobile Health Apps Among US Military Veterans: Cross-sectional Survey.JMIR mHealth and uHealth · 2022Article
- Meditation Mobile App Developed for Patients With and Survivors of Cancer: Feasibility Randomized Controlled Trial.JMIR cancer · 2022Article
- Digital Self-monitoring of Multiple Sclerosis: Interview Study With Dutch Health Care Providers on the Expected New Configuration of Roles and Responsibilities.JMIR mHealth and uHealth · 2022Article
- Integration of a personalised mobile health (mHealth) application into the care of patients with brain tumours: proof-of-concept study (IDEAL stage 1).BMJ surgery, interventions, & health technologies · 2022Article
- Access to Technology and Preferences for an mHealth Intervention to Promote Medication Adherence in Pediatric Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia: Approach Leveraging Behavior Change Techniques.Journal of medical Internet research · 2021Article
- What can health systems learn from COVID-19?European heart journal supplements : journal of the European Society of Cardiology · 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
7 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMobile technologies are increasingly being used to manage chronic diseases, including cancer, with the promise of improving the efficiency and effectiveness of care. Among the myriad of mobile technologies in health care, we have seen an explosion of mobile apps. The rapid increase in digital health apps is not paralleled by a similar trend in usage statistics by clinicians and patients. Little is known about how much and in what ways mobile health (mHealth) apps are used by clinicians and patients for cancer care, what variables affect their use of mHealth, and what patients' and clinicians' expectations of mHealth apps are.
objectiveThis study aimed to describe the patient and clinician population that uses mHealth in cancer care and to provide recommendations to app developers and regulators to generally increase the use and efficacy of mHealth apps.
methodsThrough a cross-sectional Web-based survey, we explored the current utilization rates of mHealth in cancer care and factors that explain the differences in utilization by patients and clinicians across the United States and 5 different countries in Europe. In addition, we conducted an international workshop with more than 100 stakeholders and a roundtable with key representatives of international organizations of clinicians and patients to solicit feedback on the survey results and develop insights into mHealth app development practices.
resultsA total of 1033 patients and 1116 clinicians participated in the survey. The proportion of cancer patients using mHealth (294/1033, 28.46%) was far lower than that of clinicians (859/1116, 76.97%). Accounting for age and salary level, the marginal probabilities of use at means are still significantly different between the 2 groups and were 69.8% for clinicians and 38.7% for patients using the propensity score-based regression adjustment with weighting technique. Moreover, our analysis identified a gap between basic and advanced users, with a prevalent use for activities related to the automation of processes and the interaction with other individuals and a limited adoption for side-effect management and compliance monitoring in both groups.
conclusionsmHealth apps can provide access to clinical and economic data that are low cost, easy to access, and personalized. The benefits can go as far as increasing patients' chances of overall survival. However, despite its potential, evidence on the actual use of mobile technologies in cancer care is not promising. If the promise of mHealth is to be fulfilled, clinician and patient usage rates will need to converge. Ideally, cancer apps should be designed in ways that strengthen the patient-physician relationship, ease physicians' workload, be tested for validity and effectiveness, and fit the criteria for reimbursement.
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.