Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36452426›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in digital health2022

Acceptability and usability of a patient portal for men with prostate cancer in follow-up care.

David O'Connor, Jane Frankland, Jo Watts, Hazel Brodie, Kevin Hamer, Claire Foster, Alison Richardson

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in digital health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Observational
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

7 authors.

David O'ConnorInformatics Department, University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust, Southampton, United Kingdom.
Jane FranklandCentre for Psychosocial Research in Cancer, School of Health Sciences, University of Southampton, Southampton, United Kingdom.
Jo WattsInformatics Department, University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust, Southampton, United Kingdom.
Hazel BrodieCentre for Psychosocial Research in Cancer, School of Health Sciences, University of Southampton, Southampton, United Kingdom.
Kevin HamerInformatics Department, University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust, Southampton, United Kingdom.
Claire FosterCentre for Psychosocial Research in Cancer, School of Health Sciences, University of Southampton, Southampton, United Kingdom.
Alison RichardsonCentre for Psychosocial Research in Cancer, School of Health Sciences, University of Southampton, Southampton, United Kingdom.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: A stratified approach to cancer follow-up care, including remote monitoring and supported self-management for suitable patients, is increasingly recommended. Patient portals can facilitate such an approach, allowing access to results and information. There is limited understanding of the use of portals within this context. Aim: This paper reports the acceptability and usability of a patient portal developed to facilitate a remote monitoring and supported self-management follow-up care programme for men with prostate cancer. Methods: A mixed methods evaluation, including analysis of service utilisation data, a survey of users' experiences and satisfaction, and telephone interviews of non-users' views and experiences. Results: Sixty percent of eligible patients registered to use the portal. Of these, 37% logged in at least once over a 6-month period and 52% over 12 months. Satisfaction among these users was reasonably high. Use of the portal in general was rated as very easy or easy by over 70% of respondents, and the majority felt the portal had helped them manage their condition in various ways. However, a large minority (40%) did not use the portal, with reasons for non-use including lack of access to computing facilities and lack of computer skills. Those who were older were less likely to register to use the portal. Conclusions: A large proportion of participants found the patient portal acceptable and easy to use. Reasons for non-use should be addressed in order to maximise system efficiencies and minimise inequalities in care, and the needs of specific groups should be taken into account.

Indexed as

acceptabilitypatient portalprostate cancerremote monitoringsatisfaction

Identifiers

PMID36452426
PMCPMC9703137

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.