SynthesisJCO clinical cancer informatics2023
Smartphone-Based Passive Sensing in Monitoring Patients With Cancer: A Systematic Review.
Synthesis in JCO clinical cancer informatics, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Clinical Outcomes of Passive Sensors in Remote Monitoring: A Systematic Review.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Pooled it
- Benefit of adding Cureety Techcare telemonitoring to usual care during injectable anticancer treatment: the OPTIMACURE multicentric French prospective randomized study.BMC health services research · 2025Trial
- Digital solutions, real-world challenges: lessons from mHealth trials in oncology.Frontiers in digital health · 2025Trial
- Designing and conducting interventional trials with passive-sensing applications on patient-owned smartphones: challenges and recommendations from the BD4QoL study.Frontiers in digital health · 2026Article
- Current challenges and opportunities in active and passive data collection for mobile health sensing: a scoping review.JAMIA open · 2025Review
- Machine Learning-Based Prediction of Clinical Outcomes in Patients With Cancer Receiving Systemic Treatment Using Step Count Data Measured With Smartphones.JCO clinical cancer informatics · 2025Observational
- Smartphone as a Sensor in mHealth: Narrative Overview, SWOT Analysis, and Proposal of Mobile Biomarkers.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Perspectives, willingness, and current use of mobile health (mHealth) by patients with cancer for remote monitoring during cancer treatment: a Dutch national cross-sectional survey.ESMO real world data and digital oncology · 2025Article
- Remote Patient Monitoring Using Mobile Health Technology in Cancer Care and Research: Patients' Views and Preferences.JCO clinical cancer informatics · 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
9 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposePatients with cancer are prone to frequent unplanned hospital visits because of disease or treatment complications. Smartphone-based passive sensing (SBPS) comprises data collection using smartphone sensors or device usage patterns, which may be an affordable and burdenless technique for remote monitoring of patients with cancer and timely detection of safety events. The aim of this article was to systematically review the published literature to identify the current state of SBPS in oncology care and research.
methodsA literature search was done with cutoff date July 29, 2022, using six different databases. Articles were included if they reported original studies using SBPS in patients with cancer or cancer survivors. Data extracted from studies included type of sensors used, cancer type, study objectives, and main findings.
resultsTwelve studies were included, the oldest report being from 2017. The most frequent of the nine analyzed sensors and smartphone analytics was the accelerometer (eight studies) and geolocation (eight studies), followed by call logs (two studies). Breast cancer was the most studied cancer type (eight studies with 111 patients), followed by GI cancers (six studies with 133 patients). All studies aiming for feasibility concluded that SBPS in oncology was feasible (seven studies). SBPS was used as a monitoring tool, with passively sensed data being correlated with adverse events, symptom burden, cancer-related fatigue, decision conflict, recovery trends after surgery, or psychosocial impact. SBPS was also used in one study as a predictive tool for health deterioration.
conclusionSBPS shows early promise in oncology, although it cannot yet replace traditional tools to monitor quality of life and clinical outcomes. For this, validation of SBPS will be required. Therefore, further research is warranted with this developing technique.
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.