ReviewBMJ connections surgery2026
Impact of telemonitoring systems in cancer care: a systematic review.
Review in BMJ connections surgery, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This systematic review evaluates the impact, usability, technical performance and adherence of telemonitoring systems in adult cancer care. This systematic review followed Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses and Peer Review of Electronic Search Strategies guideline. PubMed, MEDLINE and CINAHL were searched from June 2013 to March 2025. Search terms covered cancer care, telemonitoring systems, mobile health (mHealth), eHealth, health outcomes and evaluation tools. Included studies were randomised controlled trials, controlled clinical trials or prospective trials involving adult patients with cancer using telemonitoring systems for symptom management. Exclusion criteria included cross-sectional, retrospective or non-English studies. Two reviewers screened and extracted data, with a third reviewer resolving disagreements. Risk of bias was assessed using Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool V.1. Due to heterogeneity, a narrative synthesis was conducted, categorising studies by intervention type, clinical outcomes, adherence and usability. 16 studies were included. Telemonitoring appears to hold potential in oncology care, with indications of improved quality of life, symptom management and patient engagement, particularly when real-time clinician feedback is included. While mHealth apps were well received, asynchronous systems were associated with lower adherence. Few studies addressed data security or long-term outcomes. The search was aligned with European Union (EU) - assigned eHealth for Cancer Prevention & Care (eCAN Joint Action) priorities, which may have narrowed the results and limited the overall completeness of this systematic review. Telemonitoring shows promise in oncology care but requires personalisation, workflow integration and long-term evaluation. Real-time clinician support may enhance adherence and outcomes. PROSPERO registration number CRD42023430639.
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.