Research-Tested Mobile Apps for Breast Cancer Care: Systematic Review

There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

Abstract

Background

The use of mobile health (mHealth) apps in clinical settings is increasing widely. mHealth has been used to promote prevention, improve early detection, manage care, and support survivors and chronic patients. However, data on the efficacy and utility of mHealth apps are limited.

Objective

The main objective of this review was to provide an overview of the available research-tested interventions using mHealth apps and their impact on breast cancer care.

Methods

A systematic search of Medline, PsycINFO, Embase, and Scopus was performed to identify relevant studies. From the selected studies, the following information was extracted: authors, publication date, study objectives, study population, study design, interventions’ features, outcome measures, and results.

Results

We identified 29 empirical studies that described a health care intervention using an mHealth app in breast cancer care. Of these, 7 studies were about the use of an mHealth application in an intervention for breast cancer prevention and early detection, 12 targeted care management, and 10 focused on breast cancer survivors.

Conclusions

Our results indicate consistent and promising findings of interventions using mHealth apps that target care management in breast cancer. Among the categories of mHealth apps focusing on survivorship, mHealth-based interventions showed a positive effect by promoting weight loss, improving the quality of life, and decreasing stress. There is conflicting and less conclusive data on the effect of mHealth apps on psychological dimensions. We advocate further investigation to confirm and strengthen these findings. No consistent evidence for the impact of interventions using mHealth apps in breast cancer prevention and early detection was identified due to the limited number of studies identified by our search. Future research should continue to explore the impact of mHealth apps on breast cancer care to build on these initial recommendations.

Related collections

Most cited references 36

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: found

Is Open Access

Mapping mHealth Research: A Decade of Evolution

Maddalena Fiordelli, Nicola Diviani, Peter J. Schulz (2013)

Background For the last decade, mHealth has constantly expanded as a part of eHealth. Mobile applications for health have the potential to target heterogeneous audiences and address specific needs in different situations, with diverse outcomes, and to complement highly developed health care technologies. The market is rapidly evolving, making countless new mobile technologies potentially available to the health care system; however, systematic research on the impact of these technologies on health outcomes remains scarce. Objective To provide a comprehensive view of the field of mHealth research to date and to understand whether and how the new generation of smartphones has triggered research, since their introduction 5 years ago. Specifically, we focused on studies aiming to evaluate the impact of mobile phones on health, and we sought to identify the main areas of health care delivery where mobile technologies can have an impact. Methods A systematic literature review was conducted on the impact of mobile phones and smartphones in health care. Abstracts and articles were categorized using typologies that were partly adapted from existing literature and partly created inductively from publications included in the review. Results The final sample consisted of 117 articles published between 2002 and 2012. The majority of them were published in the second half of our observation period, with a clear upsurge between 2007 and 2008, when the number of articles almost doubled. The articles were published in 77 different journals, mostly from the field of medicine or technology and medicine. Although the range of health conditions addressed was very wide, a clear focus on chronic conditions was noted. The research methodology of these studies was mostly clinical trials and pilot studies, but new designs were introduced in the second half of our observation period. The size of the samples drawn to test mobile health applications also increased over time. The majority of the studies tested basic mobile phone features (eg, text messaging), while only a few assessed the impact of smartphone apps. Regarding the investigated outcomes, we observed a shift from assessment of the technology itself to assessment of its impact. The outcome measures used in the studies were mostly clinical, including both self-reported and objective measures. Conclusions Research interest in mHealth is growing, together with an increasing complexity in research designs and aim specifications, as well as a diversification of the impact areas. However, new opportunities offered by new mobile technologies do not seem to have been explored thus far. Mapping the evolution of the field allows a better understanding of its strengths and weaknesses and can inform future developments.

0 comments Cited 212 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: found

Is Open Access

Mobile Applications for Diabetics: A Systematic Review and Expert-Based Usability Evaluation Considering the Special Requirements of Diabetes Patients Age 50 Years or Older

Madlen Arnhold, Mandy Quade, Wilhelm Kirch (2014)

Background A multitude of mhealth (mobile health) apps have been developed in recent years to support effective self-management of patients with diabetes mellitus type 1 or 2. Objective We carried out a systematic review of all currently available diabetes apps for the operating systems iOS and Android. We considered the number of newly released diabetes apps, range of functions, target user groups, languages, acquisition costs, user ratings, available interfaces, and the connection between acquisition costs and user ratings. Additionally, we examined whether the available applications serve the special needs of diabetes patients aged 50 or older by performing an expert-based usability evaluation. Methods We identified relevant keywords, comparative categories, and their specifications. Subsequently, we performed the app review based on the information given in the Google Play Store, the Apple App Store, and the apps themselves. In addition, we carried out an expert-based usability evaluation based on a representative 10% sample of diabetes apps. Results In total, we analyzed 656 apps finding that 355 (54.1%) offered just one function and 348 (53.0%) provided a documentation function. The dominating app language was English (85.4%, 560/656), patients represented the main user group (96.0%, 630/656), and the analysis of the costs revealed a trend toward free apps (53.7%, 352/656). The median price of paid apps was €1.90. The average user rating was 3.6 stars (maximum 5). Our analyses indicated no clear differences in the user rating between free and paid apps. Only 30 (4.6%) of the 656 available diabetes apps offered an interface to a measurement device. We evaluated 66 apps within the usability evaluation. On average, apps were rated best regarding the criterion “comprehensibility” (4.0 out of 5.0), while showing a lack of “fault tolerance” (2.8 out of 5.0). Of the 66 apps, 48 (72.7%) offered the ability to read the screen content aloud. The number of functions was significantly negative correlated with usability. The presence of documentation and analysis functions reduced the usability score significantly by 0.36 and 0.21 points. Conclusions A vast number of diabetes apps already exist, but the majority offer similar functionalities and combine only one to two functions in one app. Patients and physicians alike should be involved in the app development process to a greater extent. We expect that the data transmission of health parameters to physicians will gain more importance in future applications. The usability of diabetes apps for patients aged 50 or older was moderate to good. But this result applied mainly to apps offering a small range of functions. Multifunctional apps performed considerably worse in terms of usability. Moreover, the presence of a documentation or analysis function resulted in significantly lower usability scores. The operability of accessibility features for diabetes apps was quite limited, except for the feature “screen reader”.

0 comments Cited 154 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: found

Is Open Access

Twitter Social Media is an Effective Tool for Breast Cancer Patient Education and Support: Patient-Reported Outcomes by Survey

Deanna J. Attai, Michael Cowher, Mohammed Al-Hamadani … (2015)

Background Despite reported benefits, many women do not attend breast cancer support groups. Abundant online resources for support exist, but information regarding the effectiveness of participation is lacking. We report the results of a Twitter breast cancer support community participant survey. Objective The aim was to determine the effectiveness of social media as a tool for breast cancer patient education and decreasing anxiety. Methods The Breast Cancer Social Media Twitter support community (#BCSM) began in July 2011. Institutional review board approval with a waiver of informed consent was obtained for a deidentified survey that was posted for 2 weeks on Twitter and on the #BCSM blog and Facebook page. Results There were 206 respondents to the survey. In all, 92.7% (191/206) were female. Respondents reported increased knowledge about breast cancer in the following domains: overall knowledge (80.9%, 153/189), survivorship (85.7%, 162/189), metastatic breast cancer (79.4%, 150/189), cancer types and biology (70.9%, 134/189), clinical trials and research (66.1%, 125/189), treatment options (55.6%, 105/189), breast imaging (56.6%, 107/189), genetic testing and risk assessment (53.9%, 102/189), and radiotherapy (43.4%, 82/189). Participation led 31.2% (59/189) to seek a second opinion or bring additional information to the attention of their treatment team and 71.9% (136/189) reported plans to increase their outreach and advocacy efforts as a result of participation. Levels of reported anxiety before and after participation were analyzed: 29 of 43 (67%) patients who initially reported “high or extreme” anxiety reported “low or no” anxiety after participation (P<.001). Also, no patients initially reporting low or no anxiety before participation reported an increase to high or extreme anxiety after participation. Conclusions This study demonstrates that breast cancer patients’ perceived knowledge increases and their anxiety decreases by participation in a Twitter social media support group.

0 comments Cited 108 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

All references

Author and article information

Contributors

Chiara Jongerius:

Department of Medical PsychologyAmsterdam UMCUniversity of AmsterdamMeibergdreef 9Amsterdam, 1100 DDNetherlands31 205667787c.jongerius@amc.uva.nl

ORCID: http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8814-3679

Journal

Journal ID (nlm-ta): JMIR Mhealth Uhealth

Journal ID (iso-abbrev): JMIR Mhealth Uhealth

Journal ID (publisher-id): JMU

Title: JMIR mHealth and uHealth

Publisher: JMIR Publications (Toronto, Canada )

ISSN (Electronic): 2291-5222

Publication date Collection: February 2019

Publication date (Electronic): 11 February 2019

Volume: 7

Issue: 2

Electronic Location Identifier: e10930

Affiliations

[1 ] Department of Medical Psychology Amsterdam UMC University of Amsterdam Amsterdam Netherlands

[2 ] Kids Cancer Centre Sydney Children's Hospital University of New South Wales Sydney Australia

[3 ] Department of Oncology and Hemato-oncology IEO, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS Milan Italy

Author notes

Corresponding Author: Chiara Jongerius c.jongerius@ 123456amc.uva.nl

Author information

Chiara Jongerius http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8814-3679

Selena Russo http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3024-3316

Ketti Mazzocco http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1382-6779

Gabriella Pravettoni http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9135-2938

Article

Publisher ID: v7i2e10930

DOI: 10.2196/10930

PMC ID: 6388100

PubMed ID: 30741644

SO-VID: 361eb689-02fc-4092-9468-fe9e3741616f

License:

This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work, first published in JMIR mhealth and uhealth, is properly cited. The complete bibliographic information, a link to the original publication on http://mhealth.jmir.org/.as well as this copyright and license information must be included.

History

Date received : 31 May 2018

Date revision requested : 18 August 2018

Date revision received : 20 October 2018

Date accepted : 30 October 2018

Comments

Comment on this article

scite_

Cited by 53

See all cited by

Most referenced authors 793

See all reference authors

Submit your digital health research with an established publisher
- celebrating 25 years of open access