ArticleFrontiers in public health2026
Evaluation of an AI-assisted digital health follow-up system integrating humanistic care for patients undergoing chemotherapy: a prospective quasi-experimental study.
Article in Frontiers in public health, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Chemotherapy imposes substantial physical and psychological burdens that may reduce treatment adherence and quality of life. Traditional follow-up is often fragmented, reactive, and insufficiently personalized. Artificial intelligence (AI) may improve continuity, responsiveness, and patient-centered care; however, its integration with humanistic care remains underexplored. Methods: This prospective, single-center, quasi-experimental study was conducted from January to June 2024. A total of 189 patients undergoing chemotherapy were allocated to an AI-assisted follow-up group ( Results: At 3 months, the AI-assisted group had higher self-management ability scores (168.83 ± 7.03 vs. 150.11 ± 7.39), QoL scores (66.34 ± 4.30 vs. 59.81 ± 4.46), and satisfaction scores (52.35 ± 2.44 vs. 48.75 ± 2.48) than the conventional care group (all Conclusion: The nurse-supervised AI-assisted follow-up system was feasible and associated with better short-term patient-reported outcomes than conventional follow-up. Its distinguishing feature was the integration of rule-based risk management, large language model-assisted communication, and operationalized humanistic care within a closed-loop oncology nursing workflow. Randomized multicenter studies are required to confirm these findings.
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.