CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 20Mobile Health and mHealth ApplicationsCancer survivorship and careHealth Literacy and Information Accessibility

Interactive digital tools to support empowerment of people with cancer: a systematic literature review

Open access
Tuominen, Leena, Leino-Kilpi, Helena, Poraharju, Jenna, Cabutto, Daniela, Carrion, Carme, Lehtiö, Leeni, Moretó, Sónia, Stolt, Minna +2 more·2024·Supportive Care in Cancer
DOI 10.1007/s00520-024-08545-9PMC PMC11139693
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Purpose: To identify and synthesise interactive digital tools used to support the empowerment of people with cancer and the outcomes of these tools. Methods: A systematic literature review was conducted using PubMed, CINAHL, Web of Science, Cochrane, Eric, Scopus, and PsycINFO databases in May 2023. Inclusion criteria were patient empowerment as an outcome supported by interactive digital tools expressed in study goal, methods or results, peer-reviewed studies published since 2010 in cancer care. Narrative synthesis was applied, and the quality of the studies was assessed following Joanna Briggs Institute checklists. Results: Out of 1571 records screened, 39 studies published in 2011–2022 with RCT (17), single-arm trial (15), quasi-experimental (1), and qualitative designs (6) were included. A total of 30 interactive digital tools were identified to support empowerment (4) and related aspects, such as self-management (2), coping (4), patient activation (9), and self-efficacy (19). Significant positive effects were found on empowerment (1), self-management (1), coping (1), patient activation (2), and self-efficacy (10). Patient experiences were positive. Interactivity occurred with the tool itself (22), peers (7), or nurses (7), physicians (2), psychologists, (2) or social workers (1). Conclusion: Interactive digital tools have been developed extensively in recent years, varying in terms of content and methodology, favouring feasibility and pilot designs. In all of the tools, people with cancer are either active or recipients of information. The research evidence indicates positive outcomes for patient empowerment through interactive digital tools. Thus, even though promising, there still is need for further testing of the tools.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s00520-024-08545-9

Cites

10 of 10 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Education and information functions may improve self-efficacy and patient activation.

    “These functions may improve self-efficacy and patient activation [49], but they may be insufficient for addressing the psychosocial, financial, or logistical barriers that many patients face [50].”

    From User-Centered Design for Digital Patient-Navigation Tools in Oncology: Scoping Review (2026) · cites this paper as [49]

    The Results sections on self-efficacy and patient activation report improvements with some interactive digital tools, and “Elements addressed to patients” says these tools provide information. The review does not establish that the education or information functions specifically produced those improvements; it assesses the tools as a whole. Page numbers are unavailable in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.82)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 54

  1. [2]Sung H Ferlay J Siegel R Global cancer statistics 2020: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries CA Cancer J Clin 2021 71 209 249 10.3322/caac.21660 33538338 · DOI · Paper page
  2. [4]Bravo P Edwards A Barr P Conceptualising patient empowerment: a mixed methods study BMC Health Serv Res 2015 15 252 10.1186/s12913-015-0907-z 26126998 PMC4488113 · DOI
  3. [5]Te Boveldt N Vernooij-Dassen M Leppink I Patient empowerment in cancer pain management: an integrative literature review Psychooncology 2014 23 1203 1211 10.1002/pon.3573 24816749 · DOI
  4. [6]Siekkinen M Kesänen J Vahlberg T Randomized, controlled trial of the effect of e-feedback on knowledge about radiotherapy of breast cancer patients in Finland Nurs Health Sci 2015 17 97 104 10.1111/nhs.12175 25417545 · DOI
  5. [7]Ryhänen A Rankinen S Siekkinen M The impact of an empowering Internet-based breast cancer patient pathway programme on breast cancer patients’ knowledge: a randomised control trial Patient Educ Couns 2012 88 224 231 10.1016/j.pec.2012.02.013 22425373 · DOI
  6. [8]Eskildsen N Joergensen C Thomsen T Patient empowerment: a systematic review of questionnaires measuring empowerment in cancer patients Acta Oncol 2017 56 156 165 10.1080/0284186X.2016.1267402 28077053 · DOI
  7. [9]Herbert R Gagnon A Rennick J O’Loughlin J A systematic review of questionnaires measuring health-related empowerment Res Theory Nurs Pract 2009 23 107 132 10.1891/1541-6577.23.2.107 19558027 · DOI
  8. [10]Barr P Scholl I Bravo P Assessment of patient empowerment—a systematic review of measures PLoS ONE 2015 10 e0126553 10.1371/journal.pone.0126553 25970618 PMC4430483 · DOI
  9. [11]Pekonen A Eloranta S Stolt M Measuring patient empowerment—a systematic review Patient Educ Couns 2020 103 777 787 10.1016/j.pec.2019.10.019 31767243 · DOI
  10. [12]Funnell M Anderson R Arnold M Empowerment: an idea whose time has come in diabetes education Diabetes Educ 1991 17 37 41 10.1177/014572179101700108 1986902 · DOI
  11. [13]Klasnja P Pratt W Healthcare in the pocket: mapping the space of mobile-phone health interventions J Biomed Inform 2012 45 184 198 10.1016/j.jbi.2011.08.017 21925288 PMC3272165 · DOI · Paper page
  12. [15]Thomas TH, Go K, Go K et al (2022) Empowerment through technology: a systematic evaluation of the content and quality of mobile applications to empower individuals with cancer. Int J Med Inf 163. 10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2022.104782 (N.PAG-N.PAG) PMC9130924 35525126 · DOI
  13. [17]Hong Y Hossain M Chou W Digital interventions to facilitate patient-provider communication in cancer care: a systematic review Psychooncology 2020 29 591 603 10.1002/pon.5310 31834650 · DOI
  14. [18]Marthick M McGregor D Alison J Supportive care interventions for people with cancer assisted by digital technology: systematic review J Med Internet Res 2021 23 e24722 10.2196/24722 34714246 PMC8590193 · DOI
  15. [19]Briggs LG Labban M Alkhatib K Digital technologies in cancer care: a review from the clinician’s perspective J Comp Eff Res 2022 11 533 544 10.2217/cer-2021-0263 35416050 · DOI
  16. [21]Meister S Deiters W Becker S Digital health and digital biomarkers—enabling value chains on health data Curr Dir Biomed Eng 2016 2 577 581 10.1515/cdbme-2016-0128 · DOI
  17. [22]Covidence systematic review software (2023) Veritas health innovation, Melbourne, Australia. https://www.covidence.org/. Accessed 1 Nov 2023
  18. [23]Stern C Lizarondo L Carrier J Methodological guidance for the conduct of mixed methods systematic reviews JBI Evid Implement 2021 19 120 129 10.1097/XEB.0000000000000282 34061049 · DOI
  19. [28]Bender J Flora P Soheilipour S Web-based peer navigation for men with prostate cancer and their family caregivers: a pilot feasibility study Curr Oncol 2022 29 4285 4299 10.3390/curroncol29060343 35735452 PMC9221974 · DOI
  20. [30]Bouma G De Hosson L Van Woerkom C Web-based information and support for patients with a newly diagnosed neuroendocrine tumor: a feasibility study Support Care Cancer 2017 25 2075 2083 10.1007/s00520-017-3598-7 28185086 PMC5445166 · DOI
  21. [31]Cockle-Hearne J Barnett D Hicks J A web-based intervention to reduce distress after prostate cancer treatment: development and feasibility of the getting down to coping program in two different clinical settings JMIR Cancer 2018 4 e8 10.2196/cancer.8918 29712628 PMC5952123 · DOI
  22. [32]De Veer A Slev V Pasman H Assessment of a structured self-management support intervention by nurses for patients with incurable cancer Oncol Nurs Forum 2020 47 305 317 10.1188/20.ONF.305-317 32301927 · DOI
  23. [33]Dorfman C Kelleher S Winger J Development and pilot testing of an mHealth behavioral cancer pain protocol for medically underserved communities J Psychosoc Oncol 2019 37 335 349 10.1080/07347332.2018.1479327 30585762 PMC10183752 · DOI
  24. [34]Fu M Axelrod D Guth A mHealth self-care interventions: managing symptoms following breast cancer treatment mHealth 2016 2 28 28 10.21037/mhealth.2016.07.03 27493951 PMC4970761 · DOI
  25. [35]Groen W Kuijpers W Oldenburg H Supporting lung cancer patients with an interactive patient portal: feasibility study JMIR Cancer 2017 3 e10 10.2196/cancer.7443 28790025 PMC5566630 · DOI
  26. [36]Kuijpers W Groen W Oldenburg H eHealth for breast cancer survivors: use, feasibility and impact of an interactive portal JMIR Cancer 2016 2 e3 10.2196/cancer.5456 28410178 PMC5369634 · DOI · Paper page
  27. [37]Leach C Hudson S Diefenbach M Cancer health self-efficacy improvement in a randomized controlled trial Cancer 2022 128 597 605 10.1002/cncr.33947 34668569 PMC9930867 · DOI
  28. [38]Lee M Yun Y Park H-A A web-based self-management exercise and diet intervention for breast cancer survivors: pilot randomized controlled trial Int J Nurs Stud 2014 51 1557 1567 10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2014.04.012 24856854 · DOI
  29. [39]Ma D Orner D Ghaly M Automated health chats for symptom management of head and neck cancer patients undergoing radiation therapy Oral Oncol 2021 122 105551 10.1016/j.oraloncology.2021.105551 34700280 · DOI
  30. [41]Maguire R Ream E Richardson A Development of a novel remote patient monitoring system: the advanced symptom management system for radiotherapy to improve the symptom experience of patients with lung cancer receiving radiotherapy Cancer Nurs 2015 38 E37 E47 10.1097/NCC.0000000000000150 24836956 · DOI
  31. [42]Manne S Smith B Frederick S B-Sure: a randomized pilot trial of an interactive web-based decision support aid versus usual care in average-risk breast cancer patients considering contralateral prophylactic mastectomy Transl Behav Med 2020 10 355 363 10.1093/tbm/iby133 30608607 PMC7528847 · DOI
  32. [43]Melissant H Verdonck-de Leeuw I Lissenberg-Witte B ‘Oncokompas’, a web-based self-management application to support patient activation and optimal supportive care: a feasibility study among breast cancer survivors Acta Oncol 2018 57 924 934 10.1080/0284186X.2018.1438654 29451059 · DOI
  33. [44]Murphy K Sauer C Yang D The development of iManage-PC, an online symptom monitoring and self-management tool for men with clinically localized prostate cancer Cancer Nurs 2022 45 E309 E319 10.1097/NCC.0000000000000948 33867430 PMC8497651 · DOI
  34. [45]Northouse L Schafenacker A Barr K A tailored web-based psychoeducational intervention for cancer patients and their family caregivers Cancer Nurs 2014 37 321 330 10.1097/NCC.0000000000000159 24945270 PMC4164300 · DOI
  35. [46]Peipert J Lad T Kirkpatrick P A low literacy, multimedia health information technology intervention to enhance patient-centered cancer care in safety net settings increased cancer knowledge in a randomized controlled trial Cancer Control 2021 28 107327482110367 10.1177/10732748211036783 PMC8481731 34565193 · DOI
  36. [47]Petrocchi S Filipponi C Montagna G A breast cancer smartphone app to navigate the breast cancer journey: mixed methods study JMIR Form Res 2021 5 e28668 10.2196/28668 33970120 PMC8145088 · DOI
  37. [48]Poort H Ryan A MacDougall K Feasibility and acceptability of a mobile phone app intervention for coping with cancer as a young adult: pilot trial and thematic analysis J Med Internet Res 2021 23 e25069 10.2196/25069 34114957 PMC8235294 · DOI
  38. [49]Ruland C Andersen T Jeneson A Effects of an internet support system to assist cancer patients in reducing symptom distress: a randomized controlled trial Cancer Nurs 2013 36 6 17 10.1097/NCC.0b013e31824d90d4 22495503 · DOI
  39. [50]Schuit A Holtmaat K Lissenberg-Witte B Efficacy of the eHealth application Oncokompas, facilitating incurably ill cancer patients to self-manage their palliative care needs: a randomized controlled trial Lancet Reg Health - Eur 2022 18 100390 10.1016/j.lanepe.2022.100390 35496496 PMC9046636 · DOI
  40. [51]Tagai E Chambers S Hudson S Improved cancer coping from a web-based intervention for prostate cancer survivors: a randomized controlled trial Psychooncology 2021 30 1466 1475 10.1002/pon.5701 33855796 PMC9053312 · DOI
  41. [52]Van Bruinessen I Van Weel-Baumgarten E Gouw H An integrated process and outcome evaluation of a web-based communication tool for patients with malignant lymphoma: randomized controlled trial J Med Internet Res 2016 18 e206 10.2196/jmir.5877 27473173 PMC4982912 · DOI
  42. [53]Van Den Berg S Gielissen M Custers J BREATH: web-based self-management for psychological adjustment after primary breast cancer—results of a multicenter randomized controlled trial J Clin Oncol 2015 33 2763 2771 10.1200/JCO.2013.54.9386 26169621 · DOI · Paper page
  43. [56]Wang S Lu Q Ye Z Effects of a smartphone application named “shared decision making assistant” for informed patients with primary liver cancer in decision-making in China: a quasi-experimental study BMC Med Inform Decis Mak 2022 22 145 10.1186/s12911-022-01883-w 35641979 PMC9152304 · DOI
  44. [57]Wright H Martin F Clyne W A digital self-management program (help to overcome problems effectively) for people living with cancer: feasibility randomized controlled trial J Med Internet Res 2021 23 e28322 10.2196/28322 34738912 PMC8726569 · DOI
  45. [58]Breen S Kofoed S Ritchie D Remote real-time monitoring for chemotherapy side-effects in patients with blood cancers Collegian 2017 24 541 549 10.1016/j.colegn.2016.10.009 · DOI
  46. [59]Gustavell T Sundberg K Langius-Eklöf A Using an interactive app for symptom reporting and management following pancreatic cancer surgery to facilitate person-centered care: descriptive study JMIR MHealth UHealth 2020 8 e17855 10.2196/17855 32554375 PMC7330738 · DOI
  47. [60]Lambert S Duncan L Ellis J Acceptability and usefulness of a dyadic, tailored, web-based, psychosocial and physical activity self-management program (TEMPO): a qualitative study J Clin Med 2020 9 3284 10.3390/jcm9103284 33066225 PMC7650635 · DOI
  48. [61]Schuit A, Zwieten V, Holtmaat K et al (2021) Symptom monitoring in cancer and fully automated advice on supportive care: patients’ perspectives on self‐management strategies and the eHealth self‐management application Oncokompas. Eur J Cancer Care (Engl) 30. 10.1111/ecc.13497 PMC9285355 34339081 · DOI
  49. [62]Skorstad M Vistad I Fegran L Nurse-led consultations reinforced with eHealth technology: a qualitative study of the experiences of patients with gynecological cancer BMC Nurs 2022 21 326 10.1186/s12912-022-01104-9 36434602 PMC9701034 · DOI
  50. [63]Viitala A Åstedt-Kurki P Lehto J Palonen M Online follow-up with a mobile device improves incurable cancer patients’ coping—a qualitative study Eur J Oncol Nurs 2021 55 102047 10.1016/j.ejon.2021.102047 34688053 · DOI
  51. [64]Richards D (2015) The complex interventions framework. In: Richards D, Hallberg I (eds) Complex nursing interventions in health. An overview of research methods, 1st edn. Routledge, New York
  52. [65]Kuokkanen L Leino-Kilpi H Power and empowerment in nursing: three theoretical approaches J Adv Nurs 2000 31 235 241 10.1046/j.1365-2648.2000.01241.x 10632814 · DOI
  53. [66]Tengland P-A Empowerment: a conceptual discussion Health Care Anal 2008 16 77 96 10.1007/s10728-007-0067-3 17985247 · DOI
  54. [67]Bidmon S Terlutter R Gender differences in searching for health information on the Internet and the virtual patient-physician relationship in Germany: exploratory results on how men and women differ and why J Med Internet Res 2015 17 e156 10.2196/jmir.4127 26099325 PMC4526954 · DOI · Paper page

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Tuominen, L., Leino-Kilpi, H., Poraharju, J., Cabutto, D., Carrion, C., Lehtiö, L., Moretó, S., Stolt, M., Sulosaari, V., & Virtanen, H.
Affiliations
  • University of Turku (FI)
  • Universitat Oberta de Catalunya (ES)
  • Turku University of Applied Sciences (FI)
Corresponding author
Tuominen, Leena
ORCID
Venue
Supportive Care in Cancer
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2024-05-31
Volume
32
Issue
6
Pages
396-396
ISSN
  • 0941-4355 (ISSN-L)
  • 1433-7339
DOI
10.1007/s00520-024-08545-9
PMC
PMC11139693
OpenAlex
W4399248037
Cited by
20
References
10
Citations by year
2026: 10 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 1
FWCI
1.80
Type
journal article
Language
en
Update notices
correction (2024-07-11)
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Supportive Care in Cancer (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • UTUPub (University of Turku) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
  • The European Union or the Health and Digital Executive Agency (101101253)
  • University of Turku
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Mobile Health and mHealth Applications
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Cancer survivorship and care
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Literacy and Information Accessibility
Keywords
interactive digital tools, patient empowerment, cancer patients, self-management, coping, patient activation, self-efficacy, digital health interventions, peer support, nurse-patient interaction, patient experience
MeSH terms
Self-Management, Empowerment, Adaptation, Psychological, Humans, Neoplasms, Patient Participation, Self Efficacy

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