ReviewBMC health services research2024
Development of a supportive care needs eHealth application for patients with cervical cancer undergoing surgery: a feasibility study.
Review in BMC health services research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
purposeTo inform the development of an eHealth application for patients with cervical cancer for monitoring supportive care needs, perceived care supply and quality of life.
methodsA mixed-method design was used. The 19-month process involved five phases: (1) a literature review to screen the components of applications, (2) a cross-sectional needs assessment for patients with cervical cancer to define the needs and application program frame, (3) expert consultation to refine the draft, (4) software development, and (5) pilot testing and user comment collection. Patients in the intervention group received a 7-day application intervention combined with usual care. Supportive care needs, perceived care supply, quality of life and user's additional comments were collected.
resultsThe literature review results in phase 1 revealed the importance of full preparation, especially a supportive care needs assessment, before application development. Subsequent supportive care needs investigation in phase 2 revealed that the most urgent needs were informational needs and privacy protection. In phase 3, 43 expert recommendations for application improvement were refined. The new application contained the patient and the health care professional portal in phase 4. Then, on Day 7, there existed score changes of the outcome measures in both intervention and control group. Users had a positive experience with the application.
conclusionsThis study demonstrates the feasibility of applications targeting access to supportive care, which may be effective for improving the outcome measures but needed to be evaluated in future studies.
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.