ArticleSupportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer2026
Digital symptom monitoring in cancer care: an exploratory evaluation of low uptake and engagement.
Article in Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer, 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
aimTo explore the real-world uptake and engagement with OpenSYMPRO, a digital symptom-monitoring tool for patients with cancer undergoing systemic therapy, and potential barriers to its use.
methodsThe original study aimed to compare adolescents and young adults (AYAs) using openly accessible OpenSYMPRO with patients aged > 40 years using hospital-based regular SYMPRO. OpenSYMPRO was also accessible to older patients. Due to low recruitment, the planned comparative evaluation was abandoned. Engagement was summarized descriptively. All 20 enrolled participants were invited to provide feedback, and all available interviews and questionnaires were analyzed thematically, irrespective of age.
resultsOf 20 enrolled participants, 18 registered through OpenSYMPRO and 2 through regular SYMPRO. Seven completed > 2 symptom questionnaires, 9 completed 1-2, and 4 completed none. Nine participants provided qualitative feedback through interviews (n = 4) or questionnaires (n = 5), including 7 AYAs and 2 participants outside the AYA age range. Potential barriers included concurrent studies, perceived overlap between studies, forgetting the tool, limited time or cognitive capacity, and limited perceived added value. Some participants found symptom tracking useful. Respondents reported no substantial problems with technical operation, although design-related barriers could not be excluded. DISCUSSION: Uptake and engagement appeared to be influenced primarily by organizational, communication, and personal factors rather than technical operation. Stronger integration into clinical workflows, person-tailored communication of purpose and added value, active healthcare professional involvement, and attention to potential design barriers warrant further evaluation. Given the small and heterogeneous sample, and limited feedback from non-users and non-participants, findings are hypothesis-generating.
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.