ArticleJMIR cancer2025
Feasibility and Acceptability of a Mobile App to Improve Quality of Life of Long-Term Breast Cancer Survivors: Single-Arm Pre-Post Intervention Pilot Study.
Article in JMIR cancer, 2025. 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Long-term breast cancer survivors often continue to experience physical and psychological sequelae, despite being cancer-free; these challenges can negatively impact their quality of life and self-efficacy. Mobile health interventions constitute a promising strategy for providing personalized support. However, the feasibility and acceptability of these tools in long-term breast cancer survivors have not yet been sufficiently explored. Objective: This study aimed to evaluate the feasibility and acceptability of the CUMACA-M, a digital health app designed to improve the quality of life and self-efficacy in long-term breast cancer survivors. Methods: A single-arm feasibility pilot study was conducted with pre- and post-intervention evaluations. Participants were recruited from the Navarra Breast Cancer Association (Saray), a nonprofit organization supporting individuals with breast cancer in Navarra, Spain. The inclusion criteria included being female, being aged ≥18 years, having been diagnosed with breast cancer, and being disease-free for at least 5 years after primary treatment. The participants used the CUMACA-M app for 3 months. Feasibility was assessed through recruitment and completion rates, whereas acceptability was measured using the System Usability Scale and open-ended qualitative questions. Changes in quality of life and self-efficacy were analyzed with the Quality of Life-Cancer Survivors (QOL-CS) scale and the Self-Efficacy to Manage Chronic Disease Scale. Paired t tests were performed for pre-post comparisons. Results: A total of 23 women (mean age =52.8, SD 6.1 years) participated, with a 100% retention rate. The System Usability Scale score (mean 80.8, SD 15.2) indicated excellent usability. The health advice module received the highest level of satisfaction, whereas the nutrition and physical activity modules received suggestions for improvement. With respect to the clinical outcomes, no statistically significant differences were found between the pre- and post-intervention scores on the QOL-CS (total score: pre=5.96, SD 1.08; post=5.72, SD 1.20; P=.07) or the Self-Efficacy to Manage Chronic Disease Scale (total score: pre=6.57, SD 1.90; post=6.26, SD 1.82; P=.40). However, a reduction was observed in the QOL-CS spiritual well-being subscale (pre=5.35, SD 1.13; post=4.93, SD 1.22; P=.05). Conclusions: As a pioneering digital intervention for long-term breast cancer survivors, CUMACA-M appears to be a potentially viable and acceptable intervention for this population, as suggested by the high level of usability and absence of dropouts. However, the findings should be interpreted with caution because of the limited sample size and the short follow-up period. The lack of significant changes in quality of life or self-efficacy may be influenced by these constraints. Future studies with larger, more diverse samples and longer follow-up periods are needed to more robustly assess the long-term impact of this intervention.
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.