MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3136528119 · doi:10.2196/19262

Effects of Psychoeducational Interventions Using Mobile Apps and Mobile-Based Online Group Discussions on Anxiety and Self-Esteem in Women With Breast Cancer: Randomized Controlled Trial

2021· article· en· W3136528119 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Elaheh Ghanbari, Shahrzad Yektatalab, Manoosh Mehrabi

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR mhealth and uhealth · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer survivorship and care
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychoeducationRandomized controlled trialPsychological interventionBreast cancerAnxietyQuality of life (healthcare)MedicinePhysical therapymHealthClinical psychologyPsychologyPsychiatryCancerNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Psychoeducation has turned into an effective tool in taking care of cancer patients and improving their psychophysical symptoms and quality of life. Despite the growing use of mobile phone apps in medical settings for improving health, evidence supporting their effectiveness in the psychoeducation of patients with breast cancer is rarely available. OBJECTIVE: This study was conducted to investigate the effect of psychoeducational interventions on anxiety and self-esteem in women with breast cancer using a mobile app and an online support group. METHODS: An unblinded randomized controlled trial based on mobile phones was conducted in Shiraz, Iran. A research assistant recruited 82 women with nonmetastatic breast cancer aged 20 to 60 years were from clinics during a face-to-face visit at the point of care and randomly assigned to an intervention group (n=41) and a wait-list control group (n=41) through blocked randomization. The intervention group received psychoeducational interventions through a mobile phone app and participated in nurse-assisted online mobile support sessions for a total four weeks, whereas the control group was put on a waiting list. The State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI) and the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale (RSES) were used to measure the levels of anxiety and self-esteem as the main outcomes at baseline and one week after the intervention. RESULTS: A total of 82 patients with a mean age of 46.45 (SD 9.29) years recruited in Winter 2016 were randomly assigned to a wait-list control group (n=41) and intervention group (n=41). Five patients dropped out for different reasons. Comparing the postintervention mean scores of anxiety and its subscales using the independent t test showed statistically significant differences between the mobile psychoeducation group and controls (P<.001). The paired t test used to compare the postintervention mean scores of anxiety with its preintervention scores in the intervention group showed significant reductions in the scores of anxiety (95% CI -17.44 to -8.90, P<.001, d=1.02) and its two subscales (state anxiety: 95% CI -9.20 to -4.21, P<.001, d=0.88 and trait anxiety: 95% CI -8.50 to -4.12, P<.001, d=0.94). Comparing the postintervention mean scores of self-esteem showed statistically insignificant differences between the control and intervention groups (16.87 vs 17.97, P=.24). In contrast with the controls, using the paired t test showed that the increase in the postintervention mean scores of self-esteem were statistically significant in the intervention group compared with the preintervention scores (mean difference 2.05, 95% CI 1.28 to 2.82, P<.001). CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrated the key role of mobile apps in decreasing anxiety and improving self-esteem in women with breast cancer through psychoeducational interventions. Similar studies with longer follow-ups are recommended that be conducted in this context. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Iranian Registry of Clinical Trials IRCT2015072123279N2; https://en.irct.ir/trial/19882.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.062
Threshold uncertainty score0.533

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.018
GPT teacher head0.370
Teacher spread0.352 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations111
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR mhealth and uhealthSame topicCancer survivorship and careFrench-language works237,207