Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38676437›Full record

ArticleTumori2024

PROACT 2.0: A new open-source tool to improve patient-doctor communication in clinical trials.

Luca Agnelli, Andrea Villa, Fouziah Butt, Matteo Duca, Alessandro Guidi, Marcello Carapezza, Michele Addante, Gaetano Lenoci, Paul O'Regan, Laura Russo and 9 more

Abstract readEditorial
In one paragraph

Article in Tumori, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

19 authors.

Luca AgnelliDepartment of Diagnostic Innovation, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Milan, Italy.ORCID 0000-0003-0582-6170
Andrea VillaDepartment of Medical Oncology, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Milan, Italy.ORCID 0009-0002-6319-0684
Fouziah ButtDigital Cancer Research , Cancer Research UK National Biomarker Centre, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.
Matteo DucaDepartment of Medical Oncology, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Milan, Italy.
Alessandro GuidiDepartment of Diagnostic Innovation, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Milan, Italy.
Marcello CarapezzaDepartment of Medical Oncology, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Milan, Italy.
Michele AddanteDepartment of Medical Oncology, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Milan, Italy.
Gaetano LenociDepartment of Medical Oncology, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Milan, Italy.
Paul O'ReganDigital Cancer Research , Cancer Research UK National Biomarker Centre, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.
Laura RussoDepartment of Medical Oncology, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Milan, Italy.
Sara CrestaDepartment of Medical Oncology, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Milan, Italy.
Alessandra CastanoDepartment of Medical Oncology, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Milan, Italy.
Elisabella EbrahemDepartment of Medical Oncology, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Milan, Italy.
Sara AlfieriClinical Psychology Department, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Milan, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-2183-240X
Akshita PatilDigital Cancer Research , Cancer Research UK National Biomarker Centre, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.
Louise CarterThe Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK.
Caroline DiveDigital Cancer Research , Cancer Research UK National Biomarker Centre, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.
Filippo Guglielmo De BraudDepartment of Medical Oncology, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Milan, Italy.
Silvia DamianDepartment of Medical Oncology, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Milan, Italy.ORCID 0000-0001-9560-1092

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The use of Digital Healthcare Products is leading to significant improvements in clinical practice. Herein, we discuss the development of PROACT 2.0 (Patient Reported Opinions About Clinical Tolerability v2.0), a novel open-source mobile and web application developed at Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale Tumori in Milan. It was developed in collaboration with The Christie, Manchester, in the context of work package 2 of the UpSMART Accelerator project, involving a consortium of referral cancer centers from the UK, Spain and Italy. PROACT 2.0 enhances communication between patients and healthcare providers in cancer clinical trials, allowing patients to report adverse events and side effects, and healthcare teams to collect valuable patient-reported outcome measures for treatment management. PROACT 2.0 supports text, audio, and video messaging, offering a secure, non-urgent communication channel that integrates with, or replaces, traditional methods. Its user-friendly and multilingual interface provides a new route for patient engagement and streamlines the handling of logistical information. Positive feedback from initial testing warrants future enhancements for broader applicability in cancer research and treatment.

Indexed as

Clinical Trials as TopicCommunicationPhysician-Patient RelationsHumansItalyMobile ApplicationsNeoplasmsPatient Reported Outcome Measuresclinical trialcommunicationdigital healthhematology-oncologypatient careresearch

Identifiers

PMID38676437
PMCPMC11487894

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.