MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7115948209 · doi:10.2196/72647

Evaluating a Telehealth Coaching and Mobile-Based Digital Engagement Intervention for People With Cancer Using the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Global Health: Pilot Questionnaire Study

2025· article· en· W7115948209 on OpenAlexvenueno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Cancer · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTelemedicine and Telehealth Implementation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTelehealthHealth coachingDigital healthIntervention (counseling)CoachingTelemedicinemHealtheHealth

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: People with cancer often experience unmet needs during treatment and survivorship, which can impact their ability to carry out daily tasks, reduce their quality of life, and limit their participation in work and social activities. Cancer Coach by CancerAid (now known as Osara Health) is a digital health intervention designed to address these needs through a combination of synchronous telehealth coaching and an asynchronous mobile app that supports behavior change and emotional well-being. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate the impact of Cancer Coach by CancerAid on the mental and physical health of people with cancer using patient-reported outcomes. METHODS: Participants were referred to the program via insurers and hospital clinics. Health coaches administered the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System 10-item Global Health Short Form via telephone at both the beginning and end of the intervention. This tool measures global physical health (GPH) and global mental health (GMH). Pre- and postintervention scores were analyzed using Wilcoxon signed rank tests. Independent 2-tailed t tests assessed whether changes in GPH and GMH scores were associated with the use of health coaching alone or in combination with the mobile app. RESULTS: Statistically significant improvements were observed in both GPH (z=-4.97; P<.001; r=0.37) and GMH (z=-4.53; P<.001; r=0.34), indicating moderate effect sizes in the 89 participants. The average T score point changes of 4.43 for GPH and 4.58 for GMH represented a minimal important change for participants. The improvement in the group GMH T score was reflected in the move from "good" to "very good" mental health status. Participants who engaged with both health coaching and the mobile app showed greater improvements in physical health, whereas those who received health coaching alone exhibited higher gains in mental health. This suggests that the mode of support may influence specific health outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: The use of the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System 10-item Global Health Short Form showed that participants had significant improvements in physical and mental health after participating in the Cancer Coach by CancerAid️ intervention. The integration of telehealth coaching with app-based support may enhance overall well-being and address holistic needs during cancer treatment and survivorship.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.274
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.100
GPT teacher head0.457
Teacher spread0.357 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR CancerSame topicTelemedicine and Telehealth ImplementationFrench-language works237,207