Development of Quality of Life in Adolescents and Young Adults With Cancer Using a Patient Support Smartphone App: Prepost Interventional Study
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: Adolescents and young adults often experience existential concerns in addition to side effects during a cancer trajectory, which they often carry alone. Thus, cohesion with other adolescents and young adults with cancer is essential but difficult due to the relatively small, widely dispersed nationwide population. In cocreation, a smartphone app has been developed and includes an information bank, a symptom tracker, and a social community platform, aiming to improve the quality of life (QoL) in this patient group. OBJECTIVE: This nationwide, multicenter study aimed to investigate the QoL in adolescents and young adults undergoing a cancer trajectory as they used the app for 6 weeks. METHODS: Via youth support initiatives, participants were recruited from hospitals in all regions of Denmark. Inclusion criteria were patients with cancer aged 15-29 years who either initiated any cancer treatment or started follow-up after cancer treatment within 30 days. Participants used the adolescents and young adults cancer app for 6 weeks. Before and after the 6 weeks of app use, they completed the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 30 (EORTC QLQ-C30). The participants were divided into a treatment and a follow-up group for analysis. A high score for a functional scale or the global health or overall QoL represents a high or healthy level of functioning or high QoL, respectively; however, a high score for a symptom scale or item represents a high level of symptomatology. RESULTS: Overall, 81 participants were recruited. However, 4 participants did not answer the questionnaire and 6 participants did not use the app. In the treatment group (n=36), significant improvement was found in 2 domains: "Role functioning" (baseline median 33.33, IQR 16.67-83.33 vs 6 weeks median 66.67, IQR 33.33-83.33; P=.04) and "Pain" (baseline median 33.33, IQR 16.67-50.00 vs 6 weeks median 16.67, IQR 0.00-33.33; P=.04). The "Global health/Overall QoL" scale remained stable (baseline median 58.33, IQR 45.83-77.08 vs 6 weeks median 62.50, IQR 41.67-75.00; P=.25). In the follow-up group (n=35), significant improvement was found in 3 domains: "Physical functioning" (baseline median 79.23, IQR 73.33-93.33 vs 6 weeks median 82.86, IQR 73.33-100.00; P=.03), "Cognitive functioning" (baseline median 62.38, IQR 50.00-83.33 vs 6 weeks median 69.52, IQR 50.00-100.00; P=.02), and "Social functioning" (baseline median 76.19, IQR 50.00-100.00 vs 6 weeks median 85.71, IQR 83.33-100.00; P=.05), as well as in the "Global health/Overall QoL" scale (baseline median 57.14, IQR 83.33-100.00 vs 6 weeks median 75.0, IQR 62.91-85.73; P<.001). CONCLUSIONS: In this study, we found an improvement in specific QoL scales for both participants in treatment and follow-up when using the app for 6 weeks. The global health or overall QoL score improved significantly in the follow-up group. In the treatment group, it remained stable. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): RR2-10.2196/10098.
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 | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 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) | 0,000 | 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 ».