ReviewAsia-Pacific journal of oncology nursing2024
Perceptions of adult patients with cancer towards telemedicine: A qualitative meta-synthesis.
Review in Asia-Pacific journal of oncology nursing, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Experiences of Patients With Cancer Using Electronic Symptom Management Systems: Qualitative Systematic Review and Meta-Synthesis.Journal of medical Internet research · 2024Pooled it
- Evaluating a digital tool for supporting people affected by breast cancer: a prospective randomized controlled trial-the ADAPT study.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2024Trial
- Telehealth utilization during the COVID-19 pandemic: comparing breast cancer survivors to non-cancer patients and implications for current practice.Breast cancer research and treatment · 2026Article
- Design and implementation of mHealth applications for older people with cancer: A scoping review.Asia-Pacific journal of oncology nursing · 2025Review
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: This study aims to systematically identify, evaluate, and synthesize published qualitative research on the views and attitudes of adult cancer patients toward telemedicine and, consequently to better inform the future development of telemedicine technology and interventions. Methods: A meta-synthesis review was conducted to identify qualitative studies that reported adult cancer patients' perceptions toward telemedicine applications using nine electronic databases, including PubMed, MEDLINE, Web of Science, the Cochrane Library, PsycINFO, CINAHL, Wan Fang, VIP, and CNKI, from inception to November 2022. Quality appraisal was guided by the Joanna Briggs Institute's (JBI) Critical Appraisal Checklist for Qualitative Research. Data were synthesized using "thematic synthesis" to identify themes and concepts. Results: A total of 3518 articles were retrieved, of which 23 met the inclusion and exclusion criteria. These studies identified three key meta-themes and 11 key sub-themes: (1) Benefits of telemedicine: obtaining information and social support, maintaining the continuity of treatment, receiving professional assistance, having greater flexibility, and promoting physical and mental health; (2) Limitations of telemedicine: interference with normal life, privacy and security issues, auxiliary function issues, and increased psychological burden; (3) Expectations for future telemedicine: more personalized intervention, more specific and diverse information. Conclusions: The study showed that the benefits and limitations coexisted in the process of telemedicine application among adult cancer patients. It is necessary to develop personalized applications that are better suited to the needs and characteristics of adult cancer patients. Future telemedicine interventions should focus on information diversification and provide patients with more diverse and effective information. Systematic review registration: PROSPERO, CRD42022324528.
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.