ArticleJCO oncology practice2023
Assessment of Oncology Patient Engagement and Interest in Virtual Mind-Body Programming: Moving Toward Personalization of Virtual Care.
Article in JCO oncology practice, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
purposeAccelerated by the COVID-19 pandemic, the virtual platform has become a prominent medium to deliver mind-body therapies, but the extent to which patients engage in virtual mind-body programming remains unclear. This study aims to assess oncology patient engagement in a virtual mind-body program.
methodsWe surveyed oncology patients enrolled in a live-streamed (synchronous) virtual mind-body program in May 2021. Patients self-reported engagement by weekly attendance. We applied multivariate regression to identify associations of engagement with sociodemographic and clinical factors. As an exploratory analysis, we used machine learning to partition engagement subgroups to determine preferential interest in prerecorded (asynchronous) mind-body therapy videos.
resultsAmong 148 patients surveyed (response rate: 21.4%), majority were female (94.5%), White (83.1%), age 65 years or older (64.9%), retired (64.2%), and in survivorship (61.8%). Patient engagement ranged from 1 to 13 classes/week (mean [standard deviation]: 4.23 [2.56]) and was higher for female (β, .82; 95% CI, 0.01 to 1.62), non-White (β, .63; 95% CI, 0.13 to 1.13), and retired patients (β, .50; 95% CI, 0.12 to 0.88). The partition model identified three engagement subgroups: employed (low engagers), retired White (intermediate engagers), and retired non-White (high engagers). Particularly, low engagers had preferential interest in meditation videos (odds ratio, 2.85; 95% CI, 1.24 to 6.54), and both low and high engagers had preferential interest in Tai Chi videos (odds ratio, 2.26; 95% CI, 1.06 to 4.82).
conclusionIn this cross-sectional study among oncology patients, engagement in virtual mind-body programming was higher for female, non-White, and retired patients. Our findings suggest the need for both synchronous and asynchronous mind-body programming to meet the diverse needs of oncology patients.
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.