ArticleJCO oncology practice2023
Integration of Remote Symptom and Biometric Monitoring Into the Care of Adult Patients With Cancer Receiving Chemotherapy-A Decentralized Feasibility Pilot Study.
Article in JCO oncology practice, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Feasibility, acceptability and usability of a thermolabile drugs storage monitoring system at patient's home: a pilot study.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Implementation of a remote symptom monitoring pathway in oncology care: analysis of real-world experience across 33 cancer centres in France and Belgium.The Lancet regional health. Europe · 2024Article
- The Growing Role of Digital Health Tools in the Care of Patients with Cancer: Current Use, Future Opportunities, and Barriers to Effective Implementation.Current oncology reports · 2024Review
- Effect of remote patient monitoring on healthcare use among patients with cancer: A systematic review.Digital healthReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeAlthough electronic patient-reported outcomes (ePROs) are efficacious in symptom management, much is unknown about the utility of vital signs surveillance. We examined the feasibility of a remote patient monitoring platform that integrates ePROs and biometrics into the ambulatory management of symptom burden.
methodsUsing a decentralized workflow, patients with gastrointestinal or thoracic cancer were approached for a 1-month study. Patients reported symptom burden via ePROs and biometrics (blood pressure, oxygen saturation, pulse, weight, and temperature) using bluetooth-enabled devices daily. Alerts on the basis of prespecified thresholds were managed via nurse-led triage. Adherence was defined as the completion of > 70% of daily symptom and biometric reporting requirements. Pilot acceptability, appropriateness, and feasibility were measured using validated instruments. Net promoter score, system usability scale, and emergency department (ED) admission rates were collected.
resultsOver 8 months, 36 patients were enrolled and 25 (60% gastrointestinal) completed the study. Participants had a mean age of 58.0 years, mean Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group score of 0.88, were 52% female, and predominantly had stage IV or recurrent disease (72%). Program adherence was 73% and associated with high acceptability (4.63), feasibility (4.56), and appropriateness (4.46). System usability scale and net promoter score scores were 88 and 55, respectively. Seventy percent of alerts were generated by biometrics, 28% for symptoms, and 2% were patient-initiated communication. Finally, the ED visitation rate over the pilot period was 8%.
conclusionOur remote patient monitoring pilot program was highly acceptable, feasible, and appropriate. It had high rates of patient adherence and satisfaction and was associated with low ED visitation rates.
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.