2021
DOI: 10.1002/onco.13904
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Acceptability, Utility, and Cost of a Mobile Health Cancer Screening Education Application for Training Primary Care Physicians in India

Abstract: PURPOSE.Mobile health (mHealth)-based oncology education can be a powerful tool for providing cancer screening knowledge to physicians, as mobile technology is widely available and inexpensive. We developed a mobile application (M-OncoED) to educate physicians on cancer screening and tested the acceptability, utility, and cost of two different approaches to recruit physicians. METHODS. M-OncoED was designed to perform pre-and post-learning assessments through the in-built quizzes; present case studies and educ… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
18
0
2

Year Published

2022
2022
2025
2025

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

1
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 12 publications
(20 citation statements)
references
References 21 publications
0
18
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…Of the total 53 studies, nearly half the studies (45%) were quantitative(21,2628,31,3336,38,39,42,43,45,50,51,53,55,58,59,63,64,66,70), 14 (26%) were qualitative (13,20,22,29,32,37,44,4648,60,65,67,69), 12 (23%) were mixed-methods (2325,30,40,41,52,54,56,57,62,68) and 3 (6%) were review studies. (49,61,71) No study on the use of mHealth was published before 2013 and 64% (13,2051,55) of the studies were published after 2018 with the maximum (n=12, 23%)(13,22,2431,33,34) number of studies being published in 2021. The studies were conducted in tertiary care or teaching hospital settings (n=28)(22,23,2629,3138,46,47,49,5559,61,63,65,68,69,71), community health centers (n=6)(20,21,42,44,60,66), primary health centers (n=16)(13,30,40,43,48,5053),(39,54<...…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Of the total 53 studies, nearly half the studies (45%) were quantitative(21,2628,31,3336,38,39,42,43,45,50,51,53,55,58,59,63,64,66,70), 14 (26%) were qualitative (13,20,22,29,32,37,44,4648,60,65,67,69), 12 (23%) were mixed-methods (2325,30,40,41,52,54,56,57,62,68) and 3 (6%) were review studies. (49,61,71) No study on the use of mHealth was published before 2013 and 64% (13,2051,55) of the studies were published after 2018 with the maximum (n=12, 23%)(13,22,2431,33,34) number of studies being published in 2021. The studies were conducted in tertiary care or teaching hospital settings (n=28)(22,23,2629,3138,46,47,49,5559,61,63,65,68,69,71), community health centers (n=6)(20,21,42,44,60,66), primary health centers (n=16)(13,30,40,43,48,5053),(39,54<...…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A remarkable improvement in knowledge level scores from an average of 6.3 to 13.7 on a 15-point scale was seen immediately after the 3-day training program, and this score further increased to 14.4 after 6 months [ 51 ]. On the other hand, oral cancer screening knowledge showed no change among physicians with the newly developed mobile application (M-OncoED) [ 52 ]. Table 3 shows qualitative studies reporting the suitability of mHealth for early screening of oral cancer.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Mobile health technology is a widely accepted method of training, especially in the health care field. ("How Technology Could Transform Medical Training, Ease Global Shortage of Doctors" n.d.), (Odendaal et al, 2020;Opoku et al, 2017) and MOncoEd was a well thought out pragmatic method to address the issue of training needs of doctors (Subramanian et al, 2021;Dankner et al, 2018). The medical field has applied mobile technology to remote learning in rural health education (Zawacki-Richter, 2009).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%