ArticleJCO clinical cancer informatics2024
Remote Patient Monitoring Using Mobile Health Technology in Cancer Care and Research: Patients' Views and Preferences.
Article in JCO clinical cancer informatics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Electronic patient-reported outcome platforms used in hematological cancers: a systematic review.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2026Pooled it
- Digital solutions, real-world challenges: lessons from mHealth trials in oncology.Frontiers in digital health · 2025Trial
- Peripherally inserted central catheter performance in oncology patients: A retrospective analysis in an outpatient setting.The journal of vascular access · 2026Article
- Clinician Perspectives on Integrating Mobile Sensor Data Into Cancer Care: Mixed Methods Study.JMIR cancer · 2026Article
- Review
- Mobile Health Technology Ownership and Use Among Cancer Survivors in a Health System.Cancer reports (Hoboken, N.J.) · 2026Article
- Patient and physician perspectives on smartwatch-based out-of-hospital cardiac arrest detection.European heart journal. Digital health · 2025Article
- Remote monitoring in older adults with cancer, opportunities and challenges: a narrative review.Aging clinical and experimental research · 2025Review
- AI and Smart Devices in Cardio-Oncology: Advancements in Cardiotoxicity Prediction and Cardiovascular Monitoring.Diagnostics (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
- Current status and influencing factors of nutrition management in patients with digestive tract cancer from the integrated perspective of medical care staff, patients, and family caregivers: a qualitative study.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThere is an increasing interest in studying the potential of mobile health (mHealth) technologies, such as smartphone apps and wearables, as monitoring tools for patients with cancer during or after their treatment. However, little research is dedicated to exploring the opinions and concerns of patients regarding the adoption of these technologies. This study aimed to gain insight into patients' perspectives and preferences for participating in mHealth-based monitoring in cancer care.
methodsA qualitative study comprising semistructured interviews was conducted in the Netherlands between April and June 2023. Participants were eligible if they were 18 years or older with a current or past diagnosis of cancer. The interview guide was developed on the basis of the technology acceptance model, with main themes being use, communication, trust, privacy, and expectations.
resultsThirteen participants with urologic primary cancer were interviewed. Most patients had already some familiarity with the use of digital monitoring devices or wearables. Main barriers included persistent reminders of the illness, receiving notifications deemed unnecessary or unwanted, and the acknowledgment that mHealth technology does not serve as a substitute for human doctors. Conversely, patients recognized the potential for time-savings through the utilization of mHealth, viewed active monitoring as nonburdensome, considered mHealth a tool for reducing the communication threshold with their doctor, and expressed willingness to adopt such a platform if they perceived personal or societal relevance.
conclusionThis study has elucidated which factors are important for successful development of mHealth for patients with cancer. While both barriers and facilitators play a role, patients' attitudes were positive toward the implementation of remote digital monitoring, showing promising prospects for future research of mHealth in oncology.
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.