ReviewAging clinical and experimental research2025
Remote monitoring in older adults with cancer, opportunities and challenges: a narrative review.
Review in Aging clinical and experimental research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Leveraging biometric data for meaningful outcome assessments in the care of patients with brain tumors: a systematic review.Journal of neuro-oncology · 2026Pooled it
- Digital solutions, real-world challenges: lessons from mHealth trials in oncology.Frontiers in digital health · 2025Trial
- Improving diabetes management in older adults with cancer: a quality improvement project to enhance monitoring during steroid-based systemic anti-cancer therapy.European geriatric medicine · 2026Article
- Leveraging Real-World Data for Clinical Decision Making in Geriatric Oncology.Drugs & aging · 2026Review
- Preparedness for generative AI adoption among Chinese cancer survivors: a multi-center cross-sectional survey study.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe ageing population has led to more cancer cases among older adults, who face higher risks of treatment-related adverse events, functional decline, and unplanned healthcare use. Traditional assessments like Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group and Karnofsky Performance Status lack sensitivity for this group, highlighting the need for new methods to monitor symptoms and functional changes in cancer care. This review examines remote monitoring technologies for older adults with cancer, focusing on their potential and challenges. MAIN BODY: E-health tools such as electronic patient-reported outcomes (ePROs) and wearable devices enable continuous monitoring of symptoms, treatment toxicity, functional status, and adherence. Although benefits like fewer hospitalisations and better survival are shown in younger populations, evidence for older adults is limited. Early studies indicate these technologies are feasible and well-received by older patients but face barriers including digital literacy, cognitive and physical impairments, and healthcare system readiness. Devices like activity trackers and smartphones may detect functional decline and fall risk, though optimal intervention criteria remain unclear. Incorporating e-health into geriatric assessment and survivorship care could foster personalized, proactive management.
conclusionRemote monitoring technologies hold promise for enhancing symptom and functional assessment in older adults with cancer, supporting age-appropriate care. However, robust geriatric-specific evidence is lacking. Future research should address technological challenges, validate clinical thresholds, and assess long-term outcomes. Integrating these tools within multidisciplinary frameworks can improve care delivery throughout the cancer journey.
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.