ArticleBMC cancer2024
Determinants of the implementation of eHealth-based long-term follow-up care for young cancer survivors: a qualitative study.
Article in BMC cancer, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The Impact of Digitalization on European General Practice From the Perspective of General Practitioners: Systematic Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Pooled it
- Article
- Review
- Barriers and facilitators of using tele-oncology in cancer care: a scoping review.BMC health services research · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundeHealth may help closing gaps in the long-term follow-up care of former young age cancer patients. While its introduction to medical aftercare appears promising, it also faces obstacles in the course of its implementation. This study explored what prospective eHealth applications have to achieve and what facilitating and hindering factors are associated with the implementation of them.
methodsA qualitative, explorative-descriptive design involving semi-structured interviews was used in this study. General practitioners (GPs) from urban and rural areas as well as former cancer patients were recruited and interviewed. The interview guide focused on expectations of telemedical care services for the patient group of children and adolescents as well as potential facilitating and hindering factors of the implementation of telemedical care services for former cancer patients. Interviews were recorded, transcribed and analyzed on the basis of qualitative content analysis as described by Kuckartz.
resultsEmpiric saturation was reached after 25 interviews, respectively. The age of the physicians surveyed at the time of the interviews ranged from 27 to 71 years, with an average of 42 years. The former patients ranged in age from 21 to 43 at the time of participation, with an average age of 34. The age at diagnosis ranged from 3 to 31 years. eHealth services were considered an effective way to maintain continuity of care and improve the health literacy of cancer survivors. Cooperation with health insurance companies and gamification-elements were regarded as beneficial for the introduction of eHealth structures. Poor interface compatibility, insufficient network coverage and lack of digital literacy were valued as potential barriers.
conclusionsIf properly introduced, eHealth shows the potential to provide stakeholders with tools that increase their self-efficacy and ability to act. As the technology continues to advance, our data provides application-oriented factors for tailored implementation strategies to bring eHealth into the field.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
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.