ArticleJMIR mHealth and uHealth2020
A Mobile Technology for Collecting Patient-Reported Physical Activity and Distress Outcomes: Cross-Sectional Cohort Study.
Article in JMIR mHealth and uHealth, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03072966 (Development of Distress Management Algorithms Using Mobile Device Based Health Logs in Breast Cancer Survivors), which is not on this map. Cited by 5 papers.
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.
Development of Distress Management Algorithms Using Mobile Device Based Health Logs in Breast Cancer Survivors
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- The Impact of a Mobile Support Group on Distress and Physical Activity in Breast Cancer Survivors: Randomized, Parallel-Group, Open-Label, Controlled Trial.Journal of medical Internet research · 2023Trial
- Integrating Artificial Intelligence-Driven Wearable Technology in Oncology Decision-Making: A Narrative Review.Oncology · 2025Review
- Ten Considerations for Integrating Patient-Reported Outcomes into Clinical Care for Childhood Cancer Survivors.Cancers · 2023Review
- Validation of the Mobile App Version of the EQ-5D-5L Quality of Life Questionnaire Against the Gold Standard Paper-Based Version: Randomized Crossover Study.JMIR formative research · 2022Article
- An Overview of Telehealth in Total Joint Arthroplasty.HSS journal : the musculoskeletal journal of Hospital for Special Surgery · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundElectronic patient-reported outcome (PROs) provides a fast and reliable assessment of a patient's health-related quality of life. Nevertheless, using PRO in the traditional paper format is not practical for clinical practice due to the limitations associated with data analysis and management. A questionnaire app was developed to address the need for a practical way to group and use distress and physical activity assessment tools.
objectiveThe purpose of this study was to assess the level of agreement between electronic (mobile) and paper-and-pencil questionnaire responses.
methodsWe validated the app version of the distress thermometer (DT), International Physical Activity Questionnaire (IPAQ), and Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9). A total of 102 participants answered the paper and app versions of the DT and IPAQ, and 96 people completed the PHQ-9. The study outcomes were the correlation of the data between the paper-and-pencil and app versions.
resultsA total of 106 consecutive breast cancer patients were enrolled and analyzed for validation of paper and electronic (app) versions. The Spearman correlation values of paper and app surveys for patients who responded to the DT questionnaire within 7 days, within 3 days, and on the same day were .415 (P<.001), .437 (P<.001), and .603 (P<.001), respectively. Similarly, the paper and app survey correlation values of the IPAQ total physical activity metabolic equivalent of task (MET; Q2-6) were .291 (P=.003), .324 (P=.005), and .427 (P=.01), respectively. The correlation of the sum of the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (Q1-9) according to the time interval between the paper-based questionnaire and the app-based questionnaire was .469 for 14 days (P<.001), .574 for 7 days (P<.001), .593 for 3 days (P<.001), and .512 for the same day (P=.03). These were all statistically significant. Similarly, the correlation of the PHQ (Q10) value according to the time interval between the paper-based questionnaire and the app-based questionnaire was .283 for 14 days (P=.005), .409 for 7 days (P=.001), .415 for 3 days (P=.009), and .736 for the same day (P=.001). These were all statistically significant. In the overall trend, the shorter the interval between the paper-and-pencil questionnaire and the app-based questionnaire, the higher the correlation value.
conclusionsThe app version of the distress and physical activity questionnaires has shown validity and a high level of association with the paper-based DT, IPAQ (Q2-6), and PHQ-9. The app-based questionnaires were not inferior to their respective paper versions and confirm the feasibility for their use in clinical practice. The high correlation between paper and mobile app data allows the use of new mobile apps to benefit the overall health care system.
trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT03072966; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03072966.
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.