ArticleScientific reports2026
Validation of a patient-based strategy for ambulatory monitoring of oncological pain by a mobile application.
Article in Scientific reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Protocol of a Randomized Trial Investigating the Value of a Reminder App to Increase Physical Activity During Radiotherapy or Radio-Chemotherapy for Locally Advanced Lung Cancer.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Assessment of Physical Activity During Radiation Therapy for Lung Cancer: Study Protocol of the APART-LUNG Study.Clinics and practice · 2026Article
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
Abstract
The purpose of this study is to assess clinical feasibility and patient adherence to recording pain, symptoms, and medication through the mobile application Accompain. Secondary outcomes included pain evolution, quality of life, pain interference, symptom progression, medication changes, and pain alerts. In this prospective clinical validation study, adult patients with cancer-related pain used a mobile device to log pain intensity, symptoms, and daily rescue medication. The system alerted clinicians to patients with elevated pain or a high number of rescue medications. Eighty-seven patients with different tumors were recruited (60.92% women; median age 63 years; range 27–94). Data recording adherence was 73.56%. Compared to baseline (5.49 ± 1.86), patients reported decreased pain 30 days (3.79 ± 2.48, p < .0001), 45 days (4.18 ± 2.42, p < .0001), and 60 days (3.82 ± 2.37, p < .0001) after starting treatment. Patients with localized tumors reported poorer health and quality of life than those with metastasis (p < .0001). Asthenia was the most frequent symptom. Daily rescue medication reporting increased at 46–60 days after inclusion (p < .01). Physicians received a mean of 2.53 ± 3.89 alerts per week during the study. Ambulatory pain monitoring is feasible and allows remote assessment of patients’ clinical status, which could improve pain management and overall care quality. In our study, gender and metastatic stage are the factors that most influence treatment adherence.
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.