Perceptions of BELONG as a supportive e‐platform used by women with gynecologic cancers

Ahmed, Syed Irfan; Gotlieb, Walter H.; Erez, Guy; Loiselle, Carmen G.

doi:10.1002/pon.5785

Cited by 2 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Many apps did not support a specific cancer treatment (23/73, 32%) [ 46 , 51 , 53 , 62 , 71 - 74 , 83 , 84 , 86 , 88 , 93 , 95 , 98 , 99 , 104 , 105 , 108 , 112 , 117 , 118 , 121 , 124 , 126 ]. The most frequent treatment specifications were chemotherapy (15/73, 21%) [ 47 , 50 , 55 , 63 , 64 , 70 , 78 , 85 , 87 , 101 , 110 , 114 - 116 , 119 , 127 , 129 , 131 ], oral anticancer treatments (13/73, 18%) [ 9 , 48 , 52 , 56 - 58 , 65 , 76 , 80 , 82 , 90 , 91 , 94 , 111 , 122 , 128 ], radiotherapy (3/73, 4%) [ 54 , 92 , 120 ], and others (8/73, 11%) [ 12 , 16 , 45 , 59 , 60 , 66 - 69 , …”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This is the case for certain medication adherence apps that focus mainly on providing reminders to patients [ 65 , 76 , 79 , 80 , 82 , 99 , 111 ]. The remaining apps (8/73, 11%) [ 9 , 45 , 46 , 56 , 57 , 62 , 74 , 90 , 109 , 118 ] had diverse combinations of end users with patients, clinicians, caregivers, and pharmacologists. The app functionalities are listed in Table 1 .…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The selected studies assessed mHealth impact using a wide range of outcome metrics analyzed using the taxonomy by Dodd et al [ 42 ]. Outcomes most recurrently fall under the Life impact area, with 73 outcomes in the Delivery of Care outcome domain [ 8 , 9 , 12 , 16 , 45 , 46 , 48 - 55 , 57 - 63 , 65 , 67 , 70 , 71 , 73 - 87 , 90 - 92 , 94 - 104 , 107 - 116 , 119 - 122 , 128 - 131 ], 37 in Global quality of life [ 8 , 57 , 60 , 62 , 64 , 65 , 68 , 72 , 75 , 78 , 84 , 86 , 88 - 91 , 93 , 97 , 101 , 103 , 105 , 106 , 112 , 114 , 115 , 119 - 121 , 123 - 131 ], 16 in Emotional functioning and well-being [ 66 , 70 , 77 , 83 , 89 , 90 , 93 , 106 , 115 ,…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The 91 studies included for analysis describe 73 mHealth apps, of which 29 (40%) were designed for supporting any cancer types[9,12,47,48,50,54,56-58,65-69,71,73,74,76,81-83,85-88, 90,91,93,105-109,111-113,116,117,121,122,125,128], followed by 17 (23%) on breast cancer[49,64,70,72,77,78,80,[95][96][97][98]103,114,115,118,124,126,[129][130][131], 5 (7%)[52,53,63,99,101,102] on gastric and colon cancer types, 3 (4%)[75,79,89,119] on lung cancer, 3 (4%) on thyroid cancer[84,100,123] type, and 2 (3%) on hematological cancer types[9,55,56,94,121]. The remaining apps (15/73, 21%)[8,16,45,46,51,[59][60][61][62]…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Evaluating Barriers and Facilitators to the Uptake of mHealth Apps in Cancer Care Using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research: Scoping Literature Review

Ardito¹,

Golubev²,

Ciani³

et al. 2023

JMIR Cancer

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Mobile health (mHealth) solutions have proven to be effective in a wide range of patient outcomes and have proliferated over time. However, a persistent challenge of digital health technologies, including mHealth, is that they are characterized by early dropouts in clinical practice and struggle to be used outside experimental settings or on larger scales. Objective This study aimed to explore barriers and enablers to the uptake of mHealth solutions used by patients with cancer undergoing treatment, using a theory-guided implementation science model, that is, the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). Methods A scoping literature review was conducted using PubMed (MEDLINE), Web of Science, and ScienceDirect databases in March 2022. We selected studies that analyzed the development, evaluation, and implementation of mHealth solutions for patients with cancer that were used in addition to the standard of care. Only empirical designs (eg, randomized controlled trials, observational studies, and qualitative studies) were considered. First, information on the study characteristics, patient population, app functionalities, and study outcomes was extracted. Then, the CFIR model was used as a practical tool to guide data collection and interpretation of evidence on mHealth uptake. Results Overall, 91 papers were included in the data synthesis. The selected records were mostly randomized controlled trials (26/91, 29%) and single-arm, noncomparative studies (52/91, 57%). Most of the apps (42/73, 58%) were designed for both patients and clinicians and could be used to support any type of cancer (29/73, 40%) and a range of oncological treatments. Following the CFIR scheme (intervention, outer setting, inner setting, individuals, process), multistakeholder co-design, codevelopment, and testing of mHealth interventions were identified as key enablers for later uptake. A variety of external drivers emerged, although the most relevant outer incentive fostering mHealth use was addressing patient needs. Among organizational factors likely to influence technology uptake, interoperability was the most prominent, whereas other providers’ dimensions such as managerial attitudes or organizational culture were not systematically discussed. Technology-related impediments that could hamper the use of mHealth at the individual level were considered least often. Conclusions The hype surrounding mHealth in cancer care is hindered by several factors that can affect its use in real world and nonexperimental settings. Compared with the growing evidence on mHealth efficacy, knowledge to inform the uptake of mHealth solutions in clinical cancer care is still scarce. Although some of our findings are supported by previous implementation research, our analysis elaborates on the distinguishing features of mHealth apps and provides an integrated perspective on the factors that should be accounted for implementation efforts. Future syntheses should liaise these dimensions with strategies observed in successful implementation initiatives.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Evaluating Barriers and Facilitators to the Uptake of mHealth Apps in Cancer Care Using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research: Scoping Literature Review

Ardito¹,

Golubev²,

Ciani³

et al. 2023

JMIR Cancer

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Especially pertinent considering the new models of remote and hybrid care deployed during the SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) pandemic, as well as considering the higher risk for virus-related complications immunocompromised individuals with cancer face, the CIUSSS’s Segal Cancer Centre sought to increase access to supportive resources. Building upon the promising results of a pilot study among women with gynecological cancer using the DH platform, BELONG—Beating Cancer Together ( ; accessed on 20 March 2020)—considered “the world’s largest social network for individuals with cancer, caregivers and healthcare professionals”, a collaborative project between the CIUSSS and BELONG was launched in 2021 [ 26 ]. The goal of the project was to implement content and features specific to the CIUSSS on BELONG, made available exclusively for individuals with cancer and their caregivers at the institution.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Lessons Learned from the Implementation of a Person-Centred Digital Health Platform in Cancer Care

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) pandemic has accelerated the development and use of digital health platforms to support individuals with health-related challenges. This is even more frequent in the field of cancer care as the global burden of the disease continues to increase every year. However, optimal implementation of these platforms into the clinical setting requires careful planning and collaboration. An implementation project was launched between the Centre intégré universitaire de santé et de services sociaux (CIUSSS) du Centre-Ouest-de-I’Île-de-Montreal and BELONG—Beating Cancer Together—a person-centred cancer navigation and support digital health platform. The goal of the project was to implement content and features specific to the CIUSSS, to be made available exclusively for individuals with cancer (and their caregivers) treated at the institution. Guided by Structural Model of Interprofessional Collaboration, we report on implementation processes involving diverse stakeholders including clinicians, hospital administrators, researchers and local community/patient representatives. Lessons learned include earlier identification of shared goals and clear expectations, more consistent reliance on virtual means to communicate among all involved, and patient/caregiver involvement in each step to ensure informed and shared decision making.

show abstract

Perceptions of BELONG as a supportive e‐platform used by women with gynecologic cancers

Cited by 2 publications

References 6 publications

Evaluating Barriers and Facilitators to the Uptake of mHealth Apps in Cancer Care Using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research: Scoping Literature Review

Evaluating Barriers and Facilitators to the Uptake of mHealth Apps in Cancer Care Using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research: Scoping Literature Review

Lessons Learned from the Implementation of a Person-Centred Digital Health Platform in Cancer Care

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About