ArticleBMC health services research2025
Evaluation of a digital reporting and supporting tool in breast cancer prevention trials (KarmApp).
Article in BMC health services research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAnti-estrogens are widely used to reduce recurrence in breast cancer patients. The side effects often lead to treatment non-adherence and the use of anti-hormonal treatments as primary prevention in women with increased risk of breast cancer is very low. We have conducted breast cancer prevention trials aiming to lower the adverse effects of anti-hormones, but with retained effect. For increased two-way communication and to facilitate effective reporting of adverse events we have developed a smartphone application (app), the KarmApp. The aim of our study was to explore the user frequencies of the different features of the app, and if the use is influenced by age and has changed over time.
methodsHealthy women aged 40-74, attending the Swedish mammography screening program, were invited to participate in trials evaluating risk-reducing medications at different doses and formulations (KARISMA 2, N = 1,440, KARMA Creme, N = 90, and KARISMA Endoxifen, N = 240). After inclusion, participants were given instructions on how to use the app. We retrospectively evaluated the usage frequencies of the KarmApp and its various functions from 2016 to 2024. To explore the age factor attributed to KarmApp usage, age groups were formed and age was also analyzed as a continuous variable, using logistic regression.
resultsOf 1,770 participants, 1,646 (93.0%) used the KarmApp and there were 17,065 user interactions, corresponding to 9.6 interactions per person. "Study Activities Overview" was the feature most frequently used. A total of 2,985 adverse events were reported, 2,309 (77.4%) via the KarmApp. The remaining reports were mainly done via phone calls. The younger age, the more likely women were to use the app (p < 0.001), but 75% of women in the highest age group, 60-74 years, used the app. The proportion of users increased over time.
conclusionsA vast majority chose to use the KarmApp and reported side effects via the app. More prevalent use was seen among younger participants and use increased over calendar period. Supported by our data, KarmApp exemplifies the potential of using mobile technologies in clinical trials.
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.