Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31853699›Full record

ArticleSupportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer2020

User-centered design and enhancement of an electronic personal health record to support survivors of pediatric cancers.

Jordan Gilleland Marchak, Brooke Cherven, Rebecca Williamson Lewis, Paula Edwards, Lillian R Meacham, Michael Palgon, Cam Escoffery, Ann C Mertens

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

16 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Development of an electronic system for self/proxy symptom tracking alongside children with cancer and their caregivers: a co-design exemplar.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2025
    Article
  7. Review
  8. Myths and Presumptions About Cancer Survivorship.Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology · 2024
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. 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

8 authors.

Jordan Gilleland MarchakAflac Cancer and Blood Disorders Center, Children's Healthcare of Atlanta, Atlanta, GA, USA. jgillel@emory.edu.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8747-7375
Brooke ChervenAflac Cancer and Blood Disorders Center, Children's Healthcare of Atlanta, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Rebecca Williamson LewisAflac Cancer and Blood Disorders Center, Children's Healthcare of Atlanta, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Paula EdwardsHIMformatics, LLC, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Lillian R MeachamAflac Cancer and Blood Disorders Center, Children's Healthcare of Atlanta, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Michael PalgonHIMformatics, LLC, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Cam EscofferyRollins School of Public Health, Emory University, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Ann C MertensAflac Cancer and Blood Disorders Center, Children's Healthcare of Atlanta, Atlanta, GA, USA.

Funding

SurvivorLink: Scalability of an Electronic Personal Health Record for Cancer Survivors and Caregivers at Pediatric Cancer Centers.R01CA218389 · NCI · EMORY UNIVERSITY · PI ESCOFFERY, NGOC-CAM, MERTENS, ANN C · 2018 to 2022
$3.1M
Improving Pediatric Cancer Survivorship Care through SurvivorLinkR18HS017831 · AHRQ · EMORY UNIVERSITY · PI MERTENS, ANN C · 2008 to 2010
$1.2M
Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality R18 HS017831-01AHRQ HHS R18 HS017831CURE Childhood Cancer, Inc. n/aLance Armstrong Foundation n/aNational Cancer Institute of the National Institutes of Health R01CA218389NCI NIH HHS R01 CA218389
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe objective of this article is to demonstrate how user-centered design theory and methods can be employed to develop and iteratively improve technologies to support survivors of childhood cancer.

methodsFocus groups and structured interviews with young adult survivors of pediatric cancer (N = 3), parents (N = 11), and healthcare providers (N = 14) were conducted to understand their needs as potential users and the contexts in which they would use an electronic personal health record (PHR) for survivors, Cancer SurvivorLink

resultsMajor themes identified through the needs assessment guided design of the PHR, including (1) education about the lifelong healthcare needs of pediatric cancer survivors ("Learn"), (2) secure electronic storage for healthcare documents to direct long-term follow-up care ("Store"), and (3) communication functionality to allow sharing of health documents with healthcare providers ("Share"). Usability evaluations identified challenges with the PHR design, which informed site enhancements to improve PHR usefulness and ease of use including a registration wizard and healthcare provider directory.

conclusionsUser-centered design methods informed iterative enhancements to an untethered, patient-controlled PHR to address usability barriers and meet the self-identified needs of survivors of childhood cancer and their providers.

Indexed as

Cancer SurvivorsElectronic Health RecordsHealth Records, PersonalChildFocus GroupsHealth PersonnelHumansInformation DisseminationInternetNeeds AssessmentNeoplasmsPatient-Centered CareSoftware DesignUser-Computer InterfaceYoung AdultCancer survivorNeeds assessmentPersonal health recordSurvivorship care planUser-centered design

Identifiers

PMID31853699
PMCPMC7880615

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.