Cited by 25Telemedicine and Telehealth ImplementationMobile Health and mHealth ApplicationsCancer survivorship and care

The feasibility of telehealth in the monitoring of head and neck cancer patients: A systematic review on remote technology, user adherence, user satisfaction, and quality of life

da Silva, Helbert Eustáquio Cardoso, Santos, Glaucia Nize Martins, Ferreira Leite, André, Mesquita, Carla Ruffeil Moreira, de Souza Figueiredo, Paulo Tadeu, Miron Stefani, Cristine, de Santos Melo, Nilce·2022·Supportive Care in Cancer

Abstract

Objectives This systematic review aimed to analyze the use of telehealth in monitoring patients with head and neck cancer regarding the application used, user adherence to technology, user satisfaction, and user quality of life. Materials and methods A search strategy was developed using the PICO acronym and the terms "Head and Neck Cancer," "Telehealth," "Mobile Application," and "Supportive Care." A broad literature search was performed on PubMed, Cochrane Library, Scopus, Web of Science, Lilacs, and Embase databases and on grey literature through Open Grey, Google Scholar, and Jstor, for studies comparing the monitoring of head and neck cancer patients with telehealth apps to the monitoring performed in a traditional way at health units. No study design, publication status, publication time, or language restrictions were applied. Pairs of reviewers worked independently for study selection and risk of bias assessment. The protocol was registered in PROSPERO and the PRISMA checklist used for reporting the review. Results We found 393 references in the databases, 325 after duplicate removal; 19 met the criteria for full-text reading; 08 studies were included for qualitative synthesis. Although there was heterogeneity regarding the technology used, the studies included showed that remote monitoring and/or self-management of symptoms through mobile applications was feasible for most patients, with satisfactory degrees of acceptability, satisfaction, usability, and adherence. Th…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s00520-022-07109-z

Cites

51 of 51 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Systematic reviews have consistently shown that virtual care and remote symptom monitoring can improve access, patient satisfaction, symptom management, and continuity of care, particularly for rural and underserved populations.

    “Systematic reviews have consistently shown that virtual care and remote symptom monitoring can improve access, patient satisfaction, symptom management, and continuity of care, particularly for rural and underserved populations”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 52 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
da Silva, H. E. C., Santos, G. N. M., Ferreira Leite, A., Mesquita, C. R. M., de Souza Figueiredo, P. T., Miron Stefani, C., & de Santos Melo, N.
Affiliations
Universidade de Brasília (BR)
Venue
Supportive Care in Cancer
Published
2022-05-06
Volume
30
Issue
10
Pages
8391-8404
ISSN
  • 0941-4355 (ISSN-L)
  • 1433-7339
OpenAlex
W4229027095
Cited by
24
References
52
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 7
FWCI
0.89
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Supportive Care in Cancer (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Telemedicine and Telehealth Implementation
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Mobile Health and mHealth Applications
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Cancer survivorship and care
Keywords
telemedicine, head and neck cancer, remote patient monitoring, mobile health apps, user adherence, user satisfaction, health-related quality of life, symptom self-management, supportive care, self-efficacy, user experience
MeSH terms
Feasibility Studies, Head and Neck Neoplasms, Humans, Personal Satisfaction, Quality of Life, Technology, Multicenter Studies as Topic, Patient Satisfaction, Telemedicine

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review