Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42391633›Full record

ArticleJMIR formative research2026

Access to an mHealth Tool for Symptom Management in Pediatric Oncology Care: Triangulation Study.

Angelica Höök, Emma Forsgren, Maria Björk, Charlotte Castor, Emma Nordh, Stefan Nilsson

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR formative research, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

6 authors.

Angelica HöökInstitute of Health and Care Sciences, Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, Box 457, Göteborg, Västra Götaland, 40530, Sweden, 46 736855342.ORCID 0009-0006-9453-6069
Emma ForsgrenInstitute of Health and Care Sciences, Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, Box 457, Göteborg, Västra Götaland, 40530, Sweden, 46 736855342.ORCID 0000-0002-2402-0909
Maria BjörkThe CHILD Research Group, Department of Nursing, School of Health and Welfare, Jönköping University, Jönköping, Sweden.ORCID 0000-0001-6419-2417
Charlotte CastorUniversity of Gothenburg Centre for Person-Centred Care, Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, Göteborg, Västra Götaland, Sweden.ORCID 0000-0002-9188-2461
Emma NordhCrown Princess Victoria Children´s Hospital, Region Östergötland, Linköping, Östergötland, Sweden.ORCID 0009-0001-9899-0473
Stefan NilssonInstitute of Health and Care Sciences, Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, Box 457, Göteborg, Västra Götaland, 40530, Sweden, 46 736855342.ORCID 0000-0002-8847-9559

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Digital health offers opportunities to facilitate symptom assessments and communication for children with cancer, particularly after discharge. However, access to these tools must be established to ensure that they effectively support the user. PicPecc (Pictorial Support in Person-Centered Care for Children) is a mobile health tool developed to enable children to remotely assess symptoms and communicate with health care professionals. Understanding access to PicPecc is essential for evaluating its use in pediatric oncology. Objective: The aim was to test a digital intervention with PicPecc in pediatric oncology care through the lens of access to technology. Methods: This study uses a triangulation approach to determine access to digital technology through an intervention, PicPecc outside hospital. Fourteen children (6-17 y), 5 parents, and 6 nurses from 2 pediatric oncology units in Sweden participated. Children were encouraged to use PicPecc for 2 weeks (achieving a median of 14, IQR 9.75-16 days) following hospital discharge to assess pain, nausea, sleep disturbances, and feelings using an assessment scale, pictures, personal notes, and a chat function. Nurses monitored assessments and responded via the administrative interface. Access was analyzed through interviews and an instrument, and by recording the consumption of PicPecc. Data analysis was based on the 5 dimensions of access (availability, accessibility, accommodation, affordability, and acceptability). Results: The intervention, PicPecc outside hospital, supported availability by enabling children to communicate symptoms in a safe and structured way. Children and parents mentioned feeling safe when they were discharged from the hospital, and nurses perceived it as a valuable complement to follow-up after discharge. PicPecc outside hospital was generally accessible, although initial challenges with log-in procedures related to the PIN code were common. Barriers related to accommodation included interpreting the scale and obtaining an overview of assessments. Affordability was high, as internet access and device availability were not barriers; however, children's motivation varied depending on symptom burden. Acceptability was strong among children up to 12 years of age, who appreciated the design and gaming function, while the older children found the visual design less age-appropriate. Conclusions: Access to the mobile health tool, PicPecc outside hospital, appears promising for supporting remote symptom assessment in pediatric oncology, particularly among children up to 12 years of age. However, identified barriers, such as motivational factors and integration into the health care system, need to be addressed.

Indexed as

Medical OncologyNeoplasmsPediatricsSymptom AssessmentTelemedicineAdolescentChildDigital HealthFemaleHumansMaleSwedenaccessdigital tooleFTSElectronic Faces Thermometer ScalemHealthmobile healthpediatric oncologyPicPeccsymptom assessment

Identifiers

PMID42391633
PMCPMC13327532

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.