Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33200997›Full record

ArticleJMIR formative research2020

Adaptation and Evaluation of a Symptom-Monitoring Digital Health Intervention for Patients With Relapsed and Refractory Multiple Myeloma: Pilot Mixed-Methods Implementation Study.

Noa Biran, Robin Anthony Kouyaté, Emre Yucel, Gillian E McGovern, Antoinette M Schoenthaler, Olivia G Durling, Rashmi Unawane, Andrew Schutt, Sumeet Panjabi

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR formative research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
2.0field-weighted citation impact, top 11% 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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 25 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Electronic patient-reported outcome platforms used in hematological cancers: a systematic review.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2026
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. 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

9 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Noa Biran *Division of Multiple Myeloma, John Theurer Cancer Center, Hackensack University Medical Center, Hackensack, NJ, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0693-4202
Robin Anthony KouyatéAmgen Inc, Thousand Oaks, CA, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1554-6332
Emre YucelAmgen Inc, Thousand Oaks, CA, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6036-9526
Gillian E McGovernRip Road Inc, New York, NY, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5043-9914
Antoinette M SchoenthalerDepartment of Population Health, NYU School of Medicine, New York, NY, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4905-5136
Olivia G DurlingRip Road Inc, New York, NY, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9377-6032
Rashmi UnawaneDivision of Multiple Myeloma, John Theurer Cancer Center, Hackensack University Medical Center, Hackensack, NJ, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9413-5827
Andrew SchuttMedocity Inc, Parsippany, NJ, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2157-9798
Sumeet PanjabiAmgen Inc, Thousand Oaks, CA, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5093-8510
Amgen (United States) · USAmerican Industrial Partners (United States) · USHackensack University Medical Center · USNew York University · USReckitt Benckiser (United States) · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundRelapsed and refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) is a bone marrow cancer that requires systemic treatment, which often results in severe symptom burden. Recent studies have found that electronic patient-reported outcome (ePRO) interventions implemented in the clinic setting have had positive outcomes for other oncology populations. Evidence of the efficacy of a similar approach is lacking for patients with RRMM.

objectiveRecent recommendations for digital health interventions call for the publication of descriptions of iterative development processes in order to improve reproducibility and comparability. This study is an implementation pilot aiming to evaluate the acceptability and appropriateness of an ePRO intervention for patients with RRMM and to explore its impact on clinic workflow.

methodsA total of 11 patients with RRMM were recruited from the John Theurer Cancer Center in Hackensack, New Jersey. Patients used a mobile app to report on 17 symptoms at 4 sessions, each a week apart. Patients could also report symptoms ad hoc. When reports met predefined thresholds, the clinic was alerted and patients received automated guidance. Study end points were assessed using qualitative and quantitative methods.

resultsA total of 9 patients (mean age 69.7 years) completed the study. Overall, 83% (30/36) of weekly sessions were completed. Patients found the frequency and time required to complete reporting acceptable. All patients agreed that the app was easy to use and understand. Providers felt the alerts they received required refinement. Patients and providers agreed it would be beneficial for patients to report for longer than 4 weeks. Patients felt that the training they received was adequate but contained too much information for a single session. All patients found the symptoms tracked to be appropriate; providers suggested shortening the list. All patients understood how to use the app for weekly reporting but had confusion about using it ad hoc. Providers felt the ad hoc feature could be removed. Neither patients nor providers viewed the in-app data reports but agreed on their potential value. Patients reported benefitting from symptom reporting through increased awareness of their symptoms. Clinic staff reported that app alerts were too numerous and redundant. They had difficulty responding to alerts within their existing workflow, partially because the data were not integrated into the electronic medical record system.

conclusionsOverall, the intervention was found to be acceptable and appropriate for patients with RRMM. Points of friction integrating the intervention into the clinic workflow were identified. Clinic staff provided recommendations for addressing these issues. Once such modifications are implemented, ePRO data from patients with RRMM could be used to inform and improve clinical research and care. This study underlines the importance of an iterative approach to implementation that includes all stakeholders in order to ensure successful adoption.

Indexed as

appdigital healthelectronic patient-reported outcomeePROimplementation sciencemHealthmobilemultiple myelomapatient-reported outcomePROrelapsed refractory multiple myeloma

Identifiers

PMID33200997
PMCPMC7709004
OpenAlexW3106398547

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.