A Smartphone App to Support Carers of People Living With Cancer: A Feasibility and Usability Study
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: Carers experience unique needs while caring for someone with cancer. Interventions that address carers' needs and well-being have been developed and tested; however, the use of smartphone apps to support adult carers looking after another adult with cancer has not been assessed. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to test the feasibility, usability, and acceptability of a smartphone app, called the Carer Guide App, for carers of people with colorectal cancer. METHODS: We recruited carers of people with colorectal cancer from outpatient day oncology units and provided them with access to the smartphone app for 30 days. Carers had access to video instructions and email contact details for technical support. Carers received 2 email messages per week that directed them to resources available within the app. Carers completed demographic questions at baseline and questions related to feasibility and usability at 30 days post app download. We used recruitment and attrition rates to determine feasibility and relevance of content to carers' needs as self-reported by carers. We assessed usability through the ease of navigation and design and use of technical support or instructional videos. Acceptability was measured through self-reported usage, usage statistics provided by Google Analytics, and comments for improvement. RESULTS: We recruited 31% (26/85) eligible carers into the trial. Of the 26 carers, the majority were female (19, 73%), on average 57 years of age, were caring for a spouse with cancer (19, 73%), and held a university degree (19, 73%). Regarding feasibility, carers perceived the content of the Carer Guide App as relevant to the information they were seeking. Regarding usability, carers perceived the navigation and design of the app as easy to use. Of the 26 carers, 4 (15%) viewed the downloading and navigation video and 7 (27%) used the contact email address for queries and comments. Acceptability: On average, carers used the smartphone app for 22 minutes (SD 21 minutes) over the 30-day trial. Of 26 participants, 19 completed a follow-up questionnaire. Of 19 carers, 7 (37%) logged on 3 to 4 times during the 30 days and 5 (26%) logged on more than 5 times. The majority (16/19, 84%) of carers stated that they would recommend the app be available for all carers. Comments for improvement included individualized requests for specific content. CONCLUSIONS: The Carer Guide App was feasible and usable among carers of people with colorectal cancer. Acceptability can be improved through the inclusion of a variety of information and resources. A randomized controlled trial is required to assess the impact of the Carer Guide App on carers' health and well-being.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».