ArticlePEC innovation2022
eHealth tools for childhood cancer survivorship care: A qualitative analysis of survivors', parents', and general practitioners' views.
Article in PEC innovation, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Designing an App to Facilitate Self-Management in Young Adult Survivors of Childhood Cancer: Development and Usability Study.JMIR cancer · 2025Article
- Addressing survivorship care gaps through digital innovation: opportunities, challenges, and ethical considerations in the e-QuoL project.BMC cancer · 2025Article
- Review
- How do electronic personal health information technologies enhance obesity prevention behaviors? Examining the roles of obesity risk perception and body weight.BMC public health · 2025Article
- Digital Psychosocial Follow-up for Childhood Critical Illness Survivors: A Qualitative Interview Study on Health Professionals' Perspectives.Scandinavian journal of child and adolescent psychiatry and psychology · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: We assessed the acceptability of, and perceived benefits/barriers to, using Electronic health (eHealth) technology for childhood cancer survivorship care. Methods: We interviewed survivors, their parents, and their nominated GP. We described a hypothetical eHealth tool to manage survivorship care and asked their likely use of, and perceived benefits/concerns for, the use of the tool. Results: 31 survivors (mean age = 27.0), 29 parents (survivors' mean age = 12.6), and 51 GPs (mean years practising = 28.2) participated. Most survivors/parents (85%) and GPs (75%) indicated that they would be willing to use an eHealth tool. Survivors/parents reported that an eHealth tool would increase their confidence in their ability, and their GP's ability, to manage their survivorship care. GPs agreed that an eHealth tool would provide easier access to survivors' medical information and increase their capacity to provide support during survivorship. Some GPs (7%) and survivors (43%) reported being hesitant to use eHealth tools due to privacy/security concerns. Conclusion: Overall, eHealth tools appear acceptable and may help to improve the management of late effects for childhood cancer survivors and assist their GPs to coordinate their care. Innovation: Concerns raised by key stakeholders should be addressed in the design of eHealth technologies to optimise their uptake and effectiveness.
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.