ArticleSystematic reviews2026
Patients' experience of using online interventions for the management of late effects following completion of cancer treatment-protocol for a qualitative systematic review.
Article in Systematic reviews, 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
backgroundGlobal cancer cases are predicted to rise to 35 million by 2050 and survival rates are also increasing, meaning the number of patients experiencing late effects from their cancer treatment is expected to rise. Post-treatment side effects can present physically, psychologically, and functionally. These complications can include peripheral neuropathies, fatigue, cognitive or sexual difficulties, and heightened anxiety or depression. A wide range of online interventions have been developed as treatment and support tools for cancer patients following treatment, including self-directed or therapy-assisted programs, symptom-reporting applications and education tools. Research to examine the effectiveness of online interventions for the management of late effects has shown these interventions to have a positive impact on outcomes such as managing fatigue, depression, and overall quality of life. The aim of this study is to systematically identify, review and synthesise the qualitative experiences of patients with cancer using online interventions for managing late effects post-cancer treatment in order to further inform the design and implementation.
methodsA comprehensive search strategy has been developed to identify studies across six different databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, EMCARE, PSYCHINFO, CINAHL and The Cochrane Library). Studies will be screened and selected by two independent reviewers. The inclusion criterion includes peer-reviewed qualitative or mixed-methods studies, published on any date, with patients over the age of 18, in any geographical location or setting, and written in English. A Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) diagram will be developed to show the screening and selection process. Once included studies have been identified, Thomas and Harden's (2008) three stages of thematic synthesis will be followed by two reviewers to generate analytical themes. DISCUSSION: By reviewing patients' experience of using online interventions to help with late effects of cancer and its treatment, we hope to be able to provide some guidance for those developing and implementing these interventions into care, to maximise the benefit for patients. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO (Reference CRD42025619614).
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.