CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 2Health Literacy and Information AccessibilityCancer survivorship and careMobile Health and mHealth Applications

Digital technology as a tool to provide social support to individuals with cancer in low- and middle-income countries: A scoping review

Open access
Dau, Hallie, Kassam, Fazila, Payne, Beth A., Miller, Hana, Ogilvie, Gina·2025·PLOS Digital Health
DOI 10.1371/journal.pdig.0000609PMC PMC12011255

Published version of a preprint

Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

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. Digital technologies, such as the Internet and mobile phones, could be used to provide support to individuals with cancer in a more accessible way. The goal of this scoping review is to understand how digital technology is being utilized by individuals with cancer for social support in LMICs. 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. In all, 15 articles from 12 studies were included in the scoping review. Only four countries utilized digital technology for social support: China, Iran, Kenya, and Serbia. 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. We found that digital technology may improve quality of life, reduce anxiety and depression, and allow individuals to connect with other individuals diagnosed with cancer. We concluded that 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.

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 · 10.1371/journal.pdig.0000609

Cites

3 of 3 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 be insufficient for addressing the psychosocial, financial, or logistical barriers that many patients face.

    “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 [50]

    The Introduction identifies stigma, poor health-system infrastructure, and transportation as barriers to care, while the Results (Telecommunications) distinguishes emotional support from informational support. These passages support the concern that information alone may not address psychosocial or logistical needs, but the review does not establish that education and information functions are insufficient or address financial barriers in this comparison. (LLM, conf=0.76)

    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: 45

  1. [1]Pramesh CS, Badwe RA, Bhoo-Pathy N, Booth CM, Chinnaswamy G, Dare AJ, et al. Priorities for cancer research in low- and middle-income countries: a global perspective. Nat Med. 2022; 28(4): 649– 57. doi: 10.1038/s41591-022-01738-x 35440716 PMC9108683 · DOI
  2. [2]Ngwa W, Addai BW, Adewole I, Ainsworth V, Alaro J, Alatise OI, et al. Cancer in sub-Saharan Africa: a lancet oncology commission. Lancet Oncol. 2022; 23(6): e251– 312. doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(21)00720-8 35550267 PMC9393090 · DOI
  3. [3]Shah SC, Kayamba V, Peek RM Jr, Heimburger D. Cancer control in low- and middle-income countries: is it time to consider screening?. J Glob Oncol. 2019; 5: 1– 8. doi: 10.1200/JGO.18.00200 30908147 PMC6452918 · DOI · Paper page
  4. [7]Ruiz-Rodríguez I, Hombrados-Mendieta I, Melguizo-Garín A, Martos-Méndez M. The importance of social support, optimism, and resilience on the quality of life of cancer patients. Frontiers in Psychology. 2022: 634. PMC8959607 35356348
  5. [8]Schroevers MJ, Helgeson VS, Sanderman R, Ranchor AV. Type of social support matters for prediction of posttraumatic growth among cancer survivors. Psychooncology. 2010; 19(1): 46– 53. doi: 10.1002/pon.1501 19253269 · DOI
  6. [9]McCutchan G, Weiss B, Quinn-Scoggins H, Dao A, Downs T, Deng Y, et al. Psychosocial influences on help-seeking behaviour for cancer in low-income and lower middle-income countries: a mixed-methods systematic review. BMJ Glob Health. 2021; 6(2): e004213. doi: 10.1136/bmjgh-2020-004213 33531348 PMC7868297 · DOI
  7. [10]Rodgers S, Chen Q. Internet community group participation: psychosocial benefits for women with breast cancer. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication. 2017; 10(4): 00– 00. doi: 10.1111/j.1083-6101.2005.tb00268.x · DOI
  8. [11]Adikari A, de Silva D, Ranasinghe WKB, Bandaragoda T, Alahakoon O, Persad R, et al. Can online support groups address psychological morbidity of cancer patients? An artificial intelligence based investigation of prostate cancer trajectories. PLoS One. 2020; 15(3): e0229361. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0229361 32130256 PMC7055800 · DOI
  9. [12]Sillence E. Giving and receiving peer advice in an online breast cancer support group. Cyberpsychol Behav Soc Netw. 2013; 16(6): 480– 5. doi: 10.1089/cyber.2013.1512 23659724 · DOI
  10. [13]van Eenbergen MC, van de Poll-Franse LV, Krahmer E, Verberne S, Mols F. Analysis of content shared in online cancer communities: systematic review. JMIR Cancer. 2018; 4(1): e6. doi: 10.2196/cancer.7926 29615384 PMC5904449 · DOI
  11. [14]Tjørnhøj-Thomsen T. Online interaction. Effects of storytelling in an internet breast cancer support group. 2008. 15386774
  12. [15]van Uden-Kraan CF, Drossaert CHC, Taal E, Shaw BR, Seydel ER, van de Laar MAFJ. Empowering processes and outcomes of participation in online support groups for patients with breast cancer, arthritis, or fibromyalgia. Qual Health Res. 2008; 18(3): 405– 17. doi: 10.1177/1049732307313429 18235163 · DOI
  13. [16]Sharf BF. Communicating breast cancer on-line: support and empowerment on the Internet. Women Health. 1997; 26(1): 65– 84. doi: 10.1300/J013v26n01_05 9311100 · DOI
  14. [17]Pyle D, Perry A, Lamont-Mills A, Tehan G, Chambers SK. A scoping review of the characteristics and benefits of online prostate cancer communities. Psychooncology. 2021; 30(5): 659– 68. doi: 10.1002/pon.5618 33421248 · DOI
  15. [18]Setoyama Y, Yamazaki Y, Namayama K. Benefits of peer support in online Japanese breast cancer communities: differences between lurkers and posters. J Med Internet Res. 2011; 13(4): e122. doi: 10.2196/jmir.1696 22204869 PMC3278108 · DOI
  16. [19]Chung JE. Social networking in online support groups for health: how online social networking benefits patients. J Health Commun. 2014; 19(6): 639– 59. doi: 10.1080/10810730.2012.757396 23557148 · DOI
  17. [20]Vilhauer RP. Perceived benefits of online support groups for women with metastatic breast cancer. Women Health. 2009; 49(5): 381– 404. doi: 10.1080/03630240903238719 19851944 · DOI
  18. [23]Covidence systematic review software. Melbourne, Australia: Veritas Health Innovation; 2021.
  19. [25]Cooke B, Rossmann M, McCubbin H, Patterson J. Examining the definition and assessment of social support: A resource for individuals and families. Family Relations. 1988; 37(3): 211– 6.
  20. [26]Zhu H, Chen X, Yang J, Wu Q, Zhu J, Chan SW-C. Mobile breast cancer e-support program for Chinese women with breast cancer undergoing chemotherapy (part 3): Secondary data analysis. JMIR mHealth and uHealth. 2020; 8(9): e18896. doi: 10.2196/18896 32936087 PMC7527913 · DOI
  21. [29]Klikovac T. The first telephone line for the psychological support to oncological patients and their family members in Serbia. Srpski arhiv za celokupno lekarstvo. 2015; 143(11–12): 726– 30. 26946769
  22. [30]Lei Y, Xu S, Zhou L. User behaviors and user-generated content in Chinese online health communities: comparative study. J Med Internet Res. 2021; 23(12): e19183. doi: 10.2196/19183 34914615 PMC8717137 · DOI
  23. [31]Salajegheh M, Moazed V, Janati Z, Esmaeeli K. Studying health information behaviors of people with cancer. Int Arch Health Sci. 2020; 7(1): 31. doi: 10.4103/iahs.iahs_47_19 · DOI
  24. [32]Shaikh AJ, Dhillion N, Shah J, Kathomi C, Kiragu A, Asirwa FC, et al. Supporting Kenyan women with advanced breast cancer through a network and assessing their needs and quality of life. Support Care Cancer. 2022; 30(2): 1557– 67. doi: 10.1007/s00520-021-06539-5 34537888 PMC8449746 · DOI
  25. [33]Wang Y, Bao S, Chen Y. How does social media use influence the mental health of pancreatic cancer patients: a chain mediating effect of online social support and psychological resilience. Front Public Health. 2023; 11: 1166776. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2023.1166776 37441643 PMC10333754 · DOI
  26. [34]Zhou J, Wang C. Improving cancer survivors’ e-health literacy via online health communities (OHCs): A social support perspective. Journal of Cancer Survivorship. 2020; 14(2): 244– 52. doi: 10.1007/s11764-019-00833-2 31820215 · DOI
  27. [35]Lin H, Ye M, Lin Y, Chen F, Chan S, Cai H, et al. Mobile app for gynecologic cancer support for patients with gynecologic cancer receiving chemotherapy in china: multicenter randomized controlled trial. J Med Internet Res. 2023; 25: e49939. doi: 10.2196/49939 37955943 PMC10682921 · DOI
  28. [36]Rahimi M, Mahdizadeh M, Chamanzari H, Mahdizadeh S-M. The effect of peer support with telecommunication on subjective well-being in colorectal patients: a randomized controlled clinical trial. Int J Community Based Nurs Midwifery. 2021; 9(2): 127– 38. doi: 10.30476/ijcbnm.2021.88061.1484 33875965 PMC8053210 · DOI
  29. [37]Wang Y, Yang L, Xu W, Wang C, Chen J, Wu Y, et al. Effects of a WeChat-based multimodal psychoeducational intervention on psychological well-being and quality of life in acute leukaemia patients in China: a randomised controlled trial. J Cancer Surviv. 2022; 16(6): 1461– 77. doi: 10.1007/s11764-021-01124-5 34705196 · DOI
  30. [38]Chen X, Chaimongkol N, Hengudomsub P. Effects of a phone-based support program for women with breast cancer undergoing chemotherapy: a pilot study. SAGE Open Nurs. 2024; 10: 23779608241231176. doi: 10.1177/23779608241231176 38415216 PMC10898293 · DOI
  31. [39]Wu Q, Kue J, Zhu X, Yin X, Jiang J, Chen J, et al. Effects of nurse-led support via WeChat, a smartphone application, for breast cancer patients after surgery: a quasi-experimental study. Telemed J E Health. 2020; 26(2): 226– 34. doi: 10.1089/tmj.2018.0293 31313973 · DOI
  32. [40]Zhu J, Ebert L, Xue Z, Shen Q, Chan SW-C. Development of a mobile application of Breast Cancer e-Support program for women with breast cancer undergoing chemotherapy. Technol Health Care. 2017; 25(2): 377– 82. doi: 10.3233/THC-161292 28085020 · DOI
  33. [41]Hyland KA, Small BJ, Gray JE, Chiappori A, Creelan BC, Tanvetyanon T, et al. Loneliness as a mediator of the relationship of social cognitive variables with depressive symptoms and quality of life in lung cancer patients beginning treatment. Psychooncology. 2019; 28(6): 1234– 42. doi: 10.1002/pon.5072 30932275 · DOI
  34. [42]Polański J, Misiąg W, Chabowski M. Impact of loneliness on functioning in lung cancer patients. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2022; 19(23). PMC9739971 36497868
  35. [43]Dahill A, Al-Nakishbandi H, Cunningham KB, Humphris GM, Lowe D, Rogers SN. Loneliness and quality of life after head and neck cancer. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2020; 58(8): 959– 65. doi: 10.1016/j.bjoms.2020.04.041 32665074 · DOI
  36. [44]Ejder ZB, Sanlier N. The relationship between loneliness, psychological resilience, quality of life and taste change in cancer patients receiving chemotherapy. Support Care Cancer. 2023; 31(12): 683. doi: 10.1007/s00520-023-08156-w 37946054 · DOI
  37. [45]Fogel J, Albert SM, Schnabel F, Ditkoff BA, Neugut AI. Internet use and social support in women with breast cancer. Health Psychol. 2002; 21(4): 398– 404. doi: 10.1037//0278-6133.21.4.398 12090683 · DOI
  38. [46]Høybye MT, Johansen C, Tjørnhøj-Thomsen T. Online interaction. Effects of storytelling in an internet breast cancer support group. Psychooncology. 2005; 14(3): 211– 20. doi: 10.1002/pon.837 15386774 · DOI
  39. [47]Silva P, Delerue Matos A, Martinez-Pecino R. The contribution of the internet to reducing social isolation in individuals aged 50 years and older: quantitative study of data from the survey of health, ageing and retirement in Europe. J Med Internet Res. 2022; 24(1): e20466. doi: 10.2196/20466 34982040 PMC8764612 · DOI
  40. [50]Rubagumya F, Carson L, Mushonga M, Manirakiza A, Murenzi G, Abdihamid O, et al. An analysis of the African cancer research ecosystem: tackling disparities. BMJ Glob Health. 2023; 8(2): e011338. doi: 10.1136/bmjgh-2022-011338 36792229 PMC9933677 · DOI
  41. [53]Sung H, Ferlay J, Siegel RL, Laversanne M, Soerjomataram I, Jemal A, et al. Global Cancer Statistics 2020: GLOBOCAN Estimates of Incidence and Mortality Worldwide for 36 Cancers in 185 Countries. CA Cancer J Clin. 2021; 71(3): 209– 49. doi: 10.3322/caac.21660 33538338 · DOI · Paper page
  42. [54]Kashian N, Jacobson S. Factors of engagement and patient-reported outcomes in a stage IV breast cancer facebook group. Health Commun. 2020; 35(1): 75– 82. doi: 10.1080/10410236.2018.1536962 30351185 · DOI
  43. [55]Lazard AJ, Collins MKR, Hedrick A, Varma T, Love B, Valle CG, et al. Using social media for peer-to-peer cancer support: interviews with young adults with cancer. JMIR Cancer. 2021; 7(3): e28234. doi: 10.2196/28234 34473063 PMC8446843 · DOI
  44. [56]Donovan E, Martin SR, Seidman LC, Zeltzer LK, Cousineau TM, Payne LA, et al. The role of social media in providing support from friends for adolescent and young adult (AYA) patients and survivors of sarcoma: perspectives of AYA, parents, and providers. J Adolesc Young Adult Oncol. 2021; 10(6): 720– 5. doi: 10.1089/jayao.2020.0200 33844938 PMC8742252 · DOI
  45. [57]McNeil R, Egsdal M, Drew S, McCarthy MC, Sawyer SM. The changing nature of social support for adolescents and young adults with cancer. Eur J Oncol Nurs. 2019; 43: 101667. doi: 10.1016/j.ejon.2019.09.008 31586646 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Dau, H., Kassam, F., Payne, B. A., Miller, H., & Ogilvie, G.
Affiliations
  • University of British Columbia (CA)
  • Women's Health Research Institute (CA)
Corresponding author
Dau, Hallie
ORCID
Venue
PLOS Digital Health
Publisher
Public Library of Science (PLoS)
Published
2025-04-21
Volume
4
Issue
4
Pages
e0000609
ISSN
2767-3170 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1371/journal.pdig.0000609
PMC
PMC12011255
OpenAlex
W4409641600
Cited by
2
References
3
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 1
FWCI
2.52
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • PLOS Digital Health (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • medRxiv (acceptedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Literacy and Information Accessibility
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Cancer survivorship and care
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Mobile Health and mHealth Applications
Keywords
cancer, social support, digital technologies, low- and middle-income countries, online health communities, mobile application, telecommunications, breast cancer, quality of life, anxiety and depression, access to cancer care

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