Digital technology as a tool to provide social support to individuals with cancer in low- and middle-income countries: a scoping review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract BACKGROUND Cancer is a rising cause of morbidity and mortality in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Individuals diagnosed with cancer in LMICs often have limited access to cancer prevention, diagnosis, and treatment services. Social support after a cancer diagnosis is associated with positive health outcomes in the long term. Digital technologies, such as the Internet and mobile phones, could be used to provide support to individuals with cancer in a more accessible way. This scoping review aims to understand how digital technology is currently being utilized by individuals with cancer for social support in LMICs. METHODS Four electronic databases were searched up to June 2024 to identify studies that reported on the use of digital technology for cancer social support in LMICs. Articles were included if they were published in English, included adults diagnosed with any type of cancer, and reported the use of digital technology for social support. Study characteristics, population demographics, and technological interventions reported were extracted. RESULTS In all, 15 articles from 12 studies were included in the scoping review. The results were centralized in four countries, and the most common cancer type reported was breast. Online health communities, Internet-based resources, mobile applications, and telecommunication were the four digital technologies reported. Overall, the articles demonstrated that the use of digital technology for social support can be beneficial for individuals diagnosed with cancer in LMICs. CONCLUSION There is a limited understanding of how digital technology can be used to support individuals with cancer in LMICs. Future research is needed to explore how digital technology can be utilized by underrepresented regions to offer avenues of support for regionally common cancer types such as cervical. Fundamentally, this scoping review highlights the need for additional research on the use of digital technology to support individuals with a cancer diagnosis in LMICs.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.008 | 0.038 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.016 | 0.016 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".