Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36589761›Full record

ArticleCardiovascular digital health journal2022

Wearable device use and technology preferences in cancer survivors with or at risk for atrial fibrillation.

Jamie M Faro, Kai-Lou Yue, Aditi Singh, Apurv Soni, Eric Y Ding, Qiming Shi, David D McManus

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cardiovascular digital health journal, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing 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

10 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Contemporary management of atrial fibrillation in patients with cancer-the 2025 European Heart Rhythm Association survey.Europace : European pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac electrophysiology : journal of the working groups on cardiac pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac cellular electrophysiology of the European Society of Cardiology · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. 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.

Jamie M FaroDepartment of Population and Quantitative Health Sciences, University of Massachusetts Medical School, Worcester, Massachusetts.
Kai-Lou YueDepartment of Medicine, University of Massachusetts Chan Medical School, Worcester, Massachusetts.
Aditi SinghDepartment of Medicine, University of Massachusetts Chan Medical School, Worcester, Massachusetts.
Apurv SoniDepartment of Medicine, University of Massachusetts Chan Medical School, Worcester, Massachusetts.
Eric Y DingDepartment of Medicine, University of Massachusetts Chan Medical School, Worcester, Massachusetts.
Qiming ShiDepartment of Population and Quantitative Health Sciences, University of Massachusetts Medical School, Worcester, Massachusetts.
David D McManusDepartment of Medicine, University of Massachusetts Chan Medical School, Worcester, Massachusetts.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Cancer survivors face increased risk of heart disease, including atrial fibrillation (AF). Certain types of technology, such as consumer wearable devices, can be useful to monitor for AF, but little is known about wearables and AF monitoring in cancer survivor populations. Objective: The purpose of this study was to understand technology usage and preferences in cancer survivors with or at risk for AF, and to describe demographic factors associated with wearable device ownership in this population. Methods: Eligible patients completed a remote survey assessment regarding use of commercial wearable devices. The survey contained questions designed to assess commercial wearable device use, electronic health communications, and perceptions regarding the participant's cardiac health. Results: A total of 424 cancer survivors (mean age 74.2 years; 53.1% female; 98.8% white) were studied. Although most participants owned a smartphone (85.9%), only 31.8% owned a wearable device. Over half (53.5%) of cancer survivors were worried about their heart health. Overall, patients believed arrhythmias (79.7%) were the most important heart condition for a wearable to detect. Survivors reported being most willing to share blood pressure (95.6%) and heart rate (95.3%) data with their providers and were least willing to share information about their diet, weight, and physical activity using these devices. Conclusion: Understanding factors such as device ownership, usage, and heart health concerns in cancer survivors can play an important role in improving cardiovascular monitoring and its accessibility. Long-term patient outcomes may be improved by incorporating wearable devices into routine care of cancer survivors.

Indexed as

Cancer survivorHeart healthProvider communicationTechnologyWearables

Identifiers

PMID36589761
PMCPMC9795259

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.