Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35699991›Full record

ReviewJMIR cancer2022

eHealth Interventions for Dutch Cancer Care: Systematic Review Using the Triple Aim Lens.

Liza van Deursen, Anke Versluis, Rosalie van der Vaart, Lucille Standaar, Jeroen Struijs, Niels Chavannes, Jiska J Aardoom

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in JMIR cancer, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
1.8field-weighted citation impact, top 13% 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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Observational
  4. Investigating the early uptake of digital self-management interventions amongst Dutch cancer survivors using nationwide registry data-the OncoAppstore case.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2025
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Co-Design of the Structured Personalised Assessment for Reviews After Cancer (SPARC) Intervention.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2025
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Assessing patients' needs in the follow-up after treatment for colorectal cancer-a mixed-method study.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2024
    Article
  11. Exploring colorectal cancer survivors' perspectives on improving care delivery and the role of e-health technology: a qualitative study.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2023
    Article
  12. 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

7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Liza van DeursenDepartment of Quality of Care and Health Economics, Center for Nutrition, Prevention and Health Services, National Institute for Public Health and the Environment, Bilthoven, Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9469-3965
Anke VersluisNational eHealth Living Lab, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9489-7925
Rosalie van der VaartDepartment of Quality of Care and Health Economics, Center for Nutrition, Prevention and Health Services, National Institute for Public Health and the Environment, Bilthoven, Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8787-4186
Lucille StandaarDepartment of Quality of Care and Health Economics, Center for Nutrition, Prevention and Health Services, National Institute for Public Health and the Environment, Bilthoven, Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0073-228X
Jeroen StruijsDepartment of Quality of Care and Health Economics, Center for Nutrition, Prevention and Health Services, National Institute for Public Health and the Environment, Bilthoven, Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7493-6720
Niels ChavannesNational eHealth Living Lab, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8607-9199
Jiska J AardoomNational eHealth Living Lab, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4023-6814
Leiden University Medical Center · NLNational Institute for Public Health and the Environment · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundGlobally, the burden of cancer on population health is growing. Recent trends such as increasing survival rates have resulted in a need to adapt cancer care to ensure a good care experience and manageable expenditures. eHealth is a promising way to increase the quality of cancer care and support patients and survivors.

objectiveThe aim of this systematic review was 2-fold. First, we aimed to provide an overview of eHealth interventions and their characteristics for Dutch patients with and survivors of cancer. Second, we aimed to provide an overview of the empirical evidence regarding the impact of eHealth interventions in cancer care on population health, quality of care, and per capita costs (the Triple Aim domains).

methodsThe electronic databases Web of Science, PubMed, Cochrane, and Ovid PsycINFO were searched using 3 key search themes: eHealth interventions, cancer care, and the Netherlands. The identified interventions were classified according to predetermined criteria describing the intervention characteristics (eg, type, function, and target population). Their impact was subsequently examined using the Triple Aim framework.

resultsA total of 38 interventions were identified. Most of these were web portals or web applications functioning to inform and self-manage, and target psychosocial factors or problems. Few interventions have been tailored to age, disease severity, or gender. The results of this study indicate that eHealth interventions could positively affect sleep quality, fatigue, and physical activity of patients with and survivors of cancer. Inconclusive results were found regarding daily functioning and quality of life, psychological complaints, and psychological adjustment to the disease.

conclusionseHealth can improve outcomes in the Triple Aim domains, particularly in the population health and quality of care domains. Cancer-related pain and common symptoms of active treatment were not targeted in the included interventions and should receive more attention. Further research is needed to fully understand the impact of eHealth interventions in cancer care on participation, accessibility, and costs. The latter can be examined in economic evaluations by comparing eHealth interventions with care as usual.

Indexed as

cancercostsdigital careeHealthinterventionmobile phonepopulation healthpsychosocialquality of caresystematic reviewTriple Aim

Identifiers

PMID35699991
PMCPMC9240931
OpenAlexW4282914463

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.