Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27554525›Full record

Trial reportJournal of medical Internet research2016

Use and Appreciation of a Tailored Self-Management eHealth Intervention for Early Cancer Survivors: Process Evaluation of a Randomized Controlled Trial.

Iris Maria Kanera, Roy A Willems, Catherine A W Bolman, Ilse Mesters, Victor Zambon, Brigitte Cm Gijsen, Lilian Lechner

Erratum issuedAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Journal of medical Internet research, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 35 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
35citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

35 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Health information technology to support cancer survivorship care planning: A systematic review.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2021
    Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Iris Maria KaneraFaculty of Psychology and Educational Sciences, Open University of the Netherlands, Heerlen, Netherlands. iris.kanera@ou.nl.ORCID 0000-0001-6863-2096
Catherine A W BolmanORCID 0000-0001-9209-6449
Brigitte Cm GijsenORCID 0000-0003-4578-0293

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundA fully automated computer-tailored Web-based self-management intervention, Kanker Nazorg Wijzer (KNW [Cancer Aftercare Guide]), was developed to support early cancer survivors to adequately cope with psychosocial complaints and to promote a healthy lifestyle. The KNW self-management training modules target the following topics: return to work, fatigue, anxiety and depression, relationships, physical activity, diet, and smoking cessation. Participants were guided to relevant modules by personalized module referral advice that was based on participants’ current complaints and identified needs.

objectiveThe aim of this study was to evaluate the adherence to the module referral advice, examine the KNW module use and its predictors, and describe the appreciation of the KNW and its predictors. Additionally, we explored predictors of personal relevance.

methodsThis process evaluation was conducted as part of a randomized controlled trial. Early cancer survivors with various types of cancer were recruited from 21 Dutch hospitals. Data from online self-report questionnaires and logging data were analyzed from participants allocated to the intervention condition. Chi-square tests were applied to assess the adherence to the module referral advice, negative binominal regression analysis was used to identify predictors of module use, multiple linear regression analysis was applied to identify predictors of the appreciation, and ordered logistic regression analysis was conducted to explore possible predictors of perceived personal relevance.

resultsFrom the respondents (N=231; mean age 55.6, SD 11.5; 79.2% female [183/231]), 98.3% (227/231) were referred to one or more KNW modules (mean 2.9, SD 1.5), and 85.7% (198/231) of participants visited at least one module (mean 2.1, SD 1.6). Significant positive associations were found between the referral to specific modules (range 1-7) and the use of corresponding modules. The likelihoods of visiting modules were higher when respondents were referred to those modules by the module referral advice. Predictors of visiting a higher number of modules were a higher number of referrals by the module referral advice (β=.136, P=.009), and having a partner was significantly related with a lower number of modules used (β=-.256, P=.044). Overall appreciation was high (mean 7.5, SD 1.2; scale 1-10) and was significantly predicted by a higher perceived personal relevance (β=.623, P=.000). None of the demographic and cancer-related characteristics significantly predicted the perceived personal relevance.

conclusionsThe KNW in general and more specifically the KNW modules were well used and highly appreciated by early cancer survivors. Indications were found that the module referral advice might be a meaningful intervention component to guide the users in following a preferred selection of modules. These results indicate that the fully automated Web-based KNW provides personal relevant and valuable information and support for early cancer survivors. Therefore, this intervention can complement usual cancer aftercare and may serve as a first step in a stepped-care approach.

trial registrationNederlands Trial Register: NTR3375; http://www.trialregister.nl/trialreg/admin/rctview.asp?TC=3375 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/6jo4jO7kb).

Indexed as

InternetAdultFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasmsSelf CareSurvivorsTelemedicineappreciationcancer survivorshipcomputer tailoringeHealthintervention usagemultiple behavior interventionprocess evaluationself-managementweb-based intervention

Identifiers

PMID27554525
PMCPMC5013245

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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 Socratic graph.