MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415201822 · doi:10.2196/68411

Exploring Feature Preferences for a Treatment-Accompanying App in Patients Undergoing Radiation Therapy: Cross-Sectional Study

2025· article· en· W4415201822 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Rieka von der Warth, Nils H. Nicolay, Harald Binder, Melanie Boerries, Daniela Zöller, Anca‐Ligia Grosu, Erik Farin‐Glattacker

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Cancer · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicMobile Health and mHealth Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsmHealthFeature (linguistics)Mobile appsRadiation therapyMobile device

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Mobile health (mHealth) apps are playing an increasingly important role in health care, including in radiotherapy. However, adherence remains low. One way to increase adherence is to tailor app features to the patients' preferences. Objective: This study aimed to explore the importance of patient preferences regarding the features of a therapy-supporting app in radiotherapy. In addition, we examined factors associated with the perceived importance of these features. Methods: A cross-sectional questionnaire study was conducted with patients undergoing radiotherapy between summer 2021 and winter 2022. The subjective importance of 18 features of a treatment-accompanying app was explored using a 5-point Likert scale from 1=not so important to 5=extremely important. Descriptive analyses were used to show the rated importance of app functions. Associations with possible predictors were examined using multiple hierarchical regressions, with age (interval-scaled), gender (dichotomous), previous experience with mHealth apps (dichotomous), education (3-level nominal), and supportive care needs (interval-scaled) as predictors. Results: A total of 84 radiotherapy patients participated. The average age was 62 (SD 12.5) years. The feature with the highest importance was security against hacking (46/77, 60% extremely important). Explained variances in the regression analyses ranged between R2=0.25 (The app should give me tips on suitable sporting activities that are possible with my illness) and R2=-.07 (The app should provide me with information about suitable self-help offers). Previous mHealth usage predicted the importance of 6 features, such as managing appointments (β=.275; P<.05). Decreasing age was related to 6 features, for example, showing test results and laboratory values (β=-.358; P<.05). Other predictors were an increasing age and greater supportive care needs. Conclusions: Patients undergoing radiotherapy rated app features as having varying levels of importance. The findings may help to tailor mHealth apps in radiotherapy, potentially improving adherence to app usage.

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)0.000
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.154
Threshold uncertainty score0.715

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.200
GPT teacher head0.497
Teacher spread0.296 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR CancerSame topicMobile Health and mHealth ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207