Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32209536›Full record

ArticleJournal of medical Internet research2020

Utilizing Digital Health to Collect Electronic Patient-Reported Outcomes in Prostate Cancer: Single-Arm Pilot Trial.

Christine Tran, Adam Dicker, Benjamin Leiby, Eric Gressen, Noelle Williams, Heather Jim

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of medical Internet research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 38 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
38citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
3.4field-weighted citation impact, top 6% of its field
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

38 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 73 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Review
  7. Evaluating an electronic patient-reported outcome monitoring system in patients with prostate cancer in routine clinical care: a prospective observational study.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2025
    Observational
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Christine TranThomas Jefferson University, Sidney Kimmel Medical College and Cancer Center, Jefferson Center for Digital Health & Data Science, Philadelphia, PA, United States.ORCID 0000-0003-4373-0444
Adam DickerThomas Jefferson University, Sidney Kimmel Medical College and Cancer Center, Jefferson Center for Digital Health & Data Science, Philadelphia, PA, United States.ORCID 0000-0003-0733-3337
Benjamin LeibyThomas Jefferson University, Sidney Kimmel Medical College and Cancer Center, Jefferson Center for Digital Health & Data Science, Philadelphia, PA, United States.ORCID 0000-0003-0761-8383
Eric GressenThomas Jefferson University, Sidney Kimmel Medical College and Cancer Center, Jefferson Center for Digital Health & Data Science, Philadelphia, PA, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-8243-5459
Noelle WilliamsLevine Cancer Institute at Atrium Health, Southeast Radiation Oncology Group, Charlotte, NC, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-1870-0457
Heather JimH Lee Moffitt Cancer Center, Department of Health Outcomes and Behavior, Tampa, FL, United States.ORCID 0000-0001-7353-3711
Thomas Jefferson University · USLevine Cancer Institute · USMoffitt Cancer Center · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMeasuring patient-reported outcomes (PROs) requires an individual's perspective on their symptoms, functional status, and quality of life. Digital health enables remote electronic PRO (ePRO) assessments as a clinical decision support tool to facilitate meaningful provider interactions and personalized treatment.

objectiveThis study explored the feasibility and acceptability of collecting ePROs using validated health-related quality of life (HRQoL) questionnaires for prostate cancer.

methodsUsing Apple ResearchKit software, the Strength Through Insight app was created with content from validated HRQoL tools 26-item Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite (EPIC) or EPIC for Clinical Practice and 8-item Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy Advanced Prostate Symptom Index. In a single-arm pilot study with patients receiving prostate cancer treatment at Thomas Jefferson University Hospital and affiliates, participants were recruited, and instructed to download Strength Through Insight and complete ePROs once a week over 12 weeks. A mixed methods approach, including qualitative pre- and poststudy interviews, was used to evaluate the feasibility and acceptability of Strength Through Insight for the collection and care management of cancer treatment.

resultsThirty patients consented to the study; 1 patient failed to complete any of the questionnaires and was left out of the analysis of the intervention. Moreover, 86% (25/29) reached satisfactory questionnaire completion (defined as completion of 60% of weekly questions over 12 weeks). The lower bound of the exact one-sided 95% CI was 71%, exceeding the 70% feasibility threshold. Most participants self-identified with having a high digital literacy level (defined as the ability to use, understand, evaluate, and analyze information from multiple formats from a variety of digital sources), and only a few participants identified with having a low digital literacy level (defined as only having the ability to gather information on the Web). Interviews were thematically analyzed to reveal the following: (1) value of emotional support and wellness in cancer treatment, (2) rise of social patient advocacy in online patient communities and networks, (3) patient concerns over privacy, and (4) desire for personalized engagement tools.

conclusionsStrength Through Insight was demonstrated as a feasible and acceptable method of data collection for ePROs. A high compliance rate confirmed the app as a reliable tool for patients with localized and advanced prostate cancer. Nearly all participants reported that using the smartphone app is easier than or equivalent to the traditional paper-and-pen approach, providing evidence of acceptability and support for the use of remote PRO monitoring. This study expands on current research involving the value of digital health, as a social and behavioral science, augmented with technology, can begin to contribute to population health management, as it shapes psychographic segmentation by demographic, socioeconomic, health condition, or behavioral factors to group patients by their distinct personalities and motivations, which influence their choices.

trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NC03197948; http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NC03197948.

Indexed as

Patient Reported Outcome MeasuresAgedFeasibility StudiesHumansMaleMiddle AgedPilot ProjectsProstatic NeoplasmsQuality of LifeSurveys and QuestionnairesTelemedicinecancerchronic diseaseeHealthhealth information technologyhealth promotionhealth-related quality of lifemHealthmobile appsmobile phonepatient-centered carepatient-reported outcome measuressmartphone

Identifiers

PMID32209536
PMCPMC7142743
OpenAlexW2976180069

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.