ArticleQuality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation2026
Balancing ideals and realities: health care professionals' perspectives of and attitudes toward digital patient-centered cancer care.
Article in Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
22 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposePatient-centered care (PCC) improves quality of life, symptom management and healthcare outcomes in oncology. However, integration into routine cancer care remains limited. Digital solutions using patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) offer a potential mechanism to operationalize PCC. This study explored healthcare professionals' (HCPs) pre-implementation perspectives on using digital PROMs to support PCC in Norwegian oncology outpatient clinics, informing the design and implementation strategies of the European MyPath digital solution.
methodsSemi-structured interviews (n = 29) and three focus groups (n = 16) were conducted with varied HCPs across four Norwegian hospitals. Interviews explored perceptions of PCC, experiences with PROMs, and requirements for digital implementation. Data were analyzed using thematic analysis, combining inductive and deductive coding guided by the TPOM framework.
resultsFour themes emerged: (1) balancing PCC with disease-centered practices, (2) integrating PCC into daily routines, (3) customization and patient acceptance of digital tools, and (4) combining patient-reported data with clinical autonomy. HCPs viewed digital PROMs as promising for facilitating PCC but emphasized that successful implementation requires workflow alignment, adaptable digital solutions, and strong stakeholder engagement. Concerns included patient digital literacy, workload implications, and overreliance on PROMs at the expense of direct patient interaction.
conclusionOur findings highlight a tension between HCPs' needs for technical functionality and workflow alignment, and the support required to adapt their practice to fully realize PCC through digital tools. Integrating PCC successfully requires organizational, cultural, and workflow adaptations, alongside active HCP engagement in design and implementation. These changes are essential to reposition PCC as an integral rather than competing component of high-quality cancer care.
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.