ArticleFrontiers in oncology2022
Physicians' Perceptions of Clinical Utility of a Digital Health Tool for Electronic Patient-Reported Outcome Monitoring in Real-Life Hematology Practice. Evidence From the GIMEMA-ALLIANCE Platform.
Article in Frontiers in oncology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- 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 · 2026Pooled it
- SiMON-PRO-Hematology®: Digital techology for pharmacotherapeutic and patient reported outcomes monitoring in patients with hematologic malignancies.Exploratory research in clinical and social pharmacy · 2026Article
- Artificial Intelligence for Personalized Management of Acute Myeloid Leukemia.Journal of personalized medicine · 2026Review
- The Experience of Spanish Cancer Patients and Professionals With Quality of Life Assessment in Clinical Practice.Journal of patient experience · 2026Article
- Long-Term Monitoring of Individuals With Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Using Digital Health Technology: Qualitative Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Article
- Adherence to Patient-Reported Symptom Monitoring and Subsequent Clinical Interventions for Patients With Multiple Myeloma in Outpatient Care: Longitudinal Observational Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2023Observational
- Reducing the pressures of outpatient care: the potential role of patient-reported outcomes.Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine · 2023Review
- Early palliative care for solid and blood cancer patients and caregivers: Quantitative and qualitative results of a long-term experience as a case of value-based medicine.Frontiers in public health · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
33 authors at 11 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Digital health tools are increasingly being used in cancer care and may include electronic patient-reported outcome (ePRO) monitoring systems. We examined physicians' perceptions of usability and clinical utility of a digital health tool (GIMEMA-ALLIANCE platform) for ePRO monitoring in the real-life practice of patients with hematologic malignancies. This tool allows for the collection and assessment of ePROs with real-time graphical presentation of results to medical staff. Based on a predefined algorithm, automated alerts are sent to medical staff. Participating hematologists completed an online survey on their experience with the platform. Of the 201 patients invited to participate between December 2020 and June 2021 (cut-off date for current analysis), 180 (90%) agreed to enter the platform and had a median age of 57 years. Twenty-three hematologists with a median age of 42 years and an average of 17 years of experience in clinical practice were surveyed. All hematologists agreed or strongly agreed that the platform was easy to use, and 87%, agreed or strongly agreed that ePROs data were useful to enhance communication with their patients. The majority of physicians (78%) accessed the platform at least once per month to consult the symptom and health status profile of their patients. The frequency of access was independent of physician sex (
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.