ReviewJMIR cancer2022
The Extent of Engagement With Telehealth Approaches by Patients With Advanced Cancer: Systematic Review.
Review in JMIR cancer, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Telehealth adoption in palliative care: a systematic review of patient barriers and facilitators.BMC palliative care · 2025Pooled it
- Development and pre-pilot testing of STAMP + CBT: an mHealth app combining pain cognitive behavioral therapy and opioid support for patients with advanced cancer and pain.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2024Trial
- Impact of telemonitoring systems in cancer care: a systematic review.BMJ connections surgery · 2026Review
- Digital health and telehealth in cancer care: a scoping review of reviews.The Lancet. Digital health · 2023Article
- Distance Monitoring of Advanced Cancer Patients with Impaired Cardiac and Respiratory Function Assisted at Home: A Study Protocol in Italy.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
- Harnessing telehealth for multimorbidity management in rural and remote areas: A scoping review of interventions, outcomes, and implementation dynamics.Journal of multimorbidity and comorbidityReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundTelehealth approaches are increasingly being used to support patients with advanced diseases, including cancer. Evidence suggests that telehealth is acceptable to most patients; however, the extent of and factors influencing patient engagement remain unclear.
objectiveThe aim of this review is to characterize the extent of engagement with telehealth interventions in patients with advanced, incurable cancer reported in the international literature.
methodsThis systematic review was registered with PROSPERO (International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews) and is reported in line with PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) 2020 guidelines. A comprehensive search of databases was undertaken for telehealth interventions (communication between a patient with advanced cancer and their health professional via telehealth technologies), including MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Cochrane Library, Sociological Abstracts, and Web of Science, from the inception of each electronic database up until December 31, 2020. A narrative synthesis was conducted to outline the design, population, and context of the studies. A conceptual framework of digital engagement comprising quantitative behavioral measures (frequency, amount, duration, and depth of use) framed the analysis of engagement with telehealth approaches. Frequency data were transformed to a percentage (actual patient engagement as a proportion of intended engagement), and the interventions were characterized by intensity (high, medium, and low intended engagement) and mode of delivery for standardized comparisons across studies.
resultsOf the 19,676 identified papers, 40 (0.2%) papers covering 39 different studies were eligible for inclusion, dominated by US studies (22/39, 56%), with most being research studies (26/39, 67%). The most commonly reported measure of engagement was frequency (36/39, 92%), with substantial heterogeneity in the way in which it was measured. A standardized percentage of actual patient engagement was derived from 17 studies (17/39, 44%; n=1255), ranging from 51% to 100% with a weighted average of 75.4% (SD 15.8%). A directly proportional relationship was found between intervention intensity and actual patient engagement. Higher engagement occurred when a tablet, computer, or smartphone app was the mode of delivery.
conclusionsUnderstanding engagement for people with advanced cancer can guide the development of telehealth approaches from their design to monitoring as part of routine care. With increasing telehealth use, the development of meaningful and context- and condition-appropriate measures of telehealth engagement is needed to address the current heterogeneity in reporting while improving the understanding of optimal implementation of telehealth for oncology and palliative care.
trial registrationPROSPERO (International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews) CRD42018117232; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42018117232.
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.