Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34333588›Full record

SynthesisJournal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA2021

Health information technology to support cancer survivorship care planning: A systematic review.

Sean P Mikles, Ashley C Griffin, Arlene E Chung

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
–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

15 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Myths and Presumptions About Cancer Survivorship.Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology · 2024
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Use of Cancer Survivorship Care Guidelines by Primary Care Providers in the United States.Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine : JABFM · 2023
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
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

3 authors.

Sean P MiklesLineberger Comprehensive Cancer Outcomes Program, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-7770-7827
Ashley C GriffinCarolina Health Informatics Program, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-1535-0797
Arlene E ChungLineberger Comprehensive Cancer Outcomes Program, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA.

Funding

Cancer Care Quality Training ProgramT32CA116339 · NCI · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI ETHAN M. BASCH, Stephanie Brooke Wheeler · 2018 to 2026
$3.0M
An Interdisciplinary Program for Advanced Training in Health Data AnalyticsT15LM012500 · NLM · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI MOSTAFA, JAVED · 2017 to 2021
$2.9M
NCI NIH HHSNCI NIH HHS T32 CA116339NLM NIH HHS 5T15LM012500-04NLM NIH HHS T15 LM012500
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThe study sought to conduct a systematic review to explore the functions utilized by electronic cancer survivorship care planning interventions and assess their effects on patient and provider outcomes. MATERIALS AND

methodsBased on PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis) guidelines, studies published from January 2000 to January 2020 were identified in PubMed, CINAHL, EMBASE, PsychINFO, Scopus, Web of Science, and the ACM Digital Library . The search combined terms for cancer, survivorship, care planning, and health information technology (HIT). Eligible studies evaluated the effects of a HIT intervention on usability, knowledge, process, or health-related outcomes. A total of 578 abstracts were reviewed, resulting in 60 manuscripts describing 40 studies. Thematic analyses were used to define meta-themes of system functions, and Fisher's exact tests were used to examine associations between functions and outcomes.

resultsPatients were the target end users for 18 interventions, while 12 targeted providers and 10 targeted both groups. Interventions used patient-reported outcomes collection (60%), automated content generation (58%), electronic sharing (40%), persistent engagement (28%), and communication features (20%). Overall, interventions decreased the time to create survivorship care plans (SCPs) and supported care planning knowledge and abilities, but results were mixed for effects on healthcare utilization, SCP sharing, and provoking anxiety. Persistent engagement features were associated with improvements in health or quality-of-life outcomes (17 studies, P = .003).

conclusionsFeatures that engaged users persistently over time were associated with better health and quality-of-life outcomes. Most systems have not capitalized on the potential of HIT to share SCPs across a care team and support care coordination.

Indexed as

Medical InformaticsNeoplasmsHumansPatient Acceptance of Health CarePatient Care PlanningQuality of LifeSurvivorshipcancerinformaticsneoplasmspatient care planningsurvivorssystematic review

Identifiers

PMID34333588
PMCPMC8449616

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.