Recent Worldwide Developments in eHealth and mHealth to more Effectively Manage Cancer and other Chronic Diseases – A Systematic Review
Open accessAbstract
Summary: Objectives: This paper is a systematic literature review intended to gain an understanding of the most original, excellent, state-of-the-art research in the application of eHealth (including mHealth) in the management of chronic diseases with a focus on cancer over the past two years. Method: This review looks at peer-reviewed papers published between 2013 and 2015 and examines the background and trends in this area. It systematically searched peer-reviewed journals in databases PubMed, Proquest, Cochrane Library, Elsevier, Sage and the Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers (IEEE Digital Library) using a set of pre-defined keywords. It then employed an iterative process to filter out less relevant publications. Results: From an initial search return of 1,519,682 results returned, twenty nine of the most relevant peer reviewed articles were identified as most relevant. Conclusions: Based on the results we conclude that innovative eHealth and its subset mHealth initiatives are rapidly emerging as an important means of managing cancer and other chronic diseases. The adoption is following different paths in the developed and developing worlds. Besides governance and regulatory issues, barriers still exist around information management, interoperability and integration. These include medical records available online information for clinicians and consumers on cancer and other chronic diseases, mobile app bundles that can help manage co-morbidities and the capacity of supporting communication technologies.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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?
Political commitment is key in digital health innovation and uptake, through advocacy, financial support, and stakeholder engagement.
“Political commitment is key in digital health innovation and uptake, through advocate, financial support, and stakeholder engagement.”
From Digital health interventions for non-communicable disease management in primary health care in low-and middle-income countries (2023) · cites this paper as [41]
Lack of interoperability across different digital health systems is an important barrier for integration, especially with EHR, APPs, and online platforms.
“Lack of interoperability across different digital health systems is an important barrier for integration, especially with EHR, APPs, and online platforms.”
From Digital health interventions for non-communicable disease management in primary health care in low-and middle-income countries (2023) · cites this paper as [41]
Some unresolved data-related technical issues prohibit further uptake of digital health, including data security issues and data ownership issues.
“Some unresolved data-related technical issues prohibit further uptake of digital health, including data security issues and data ownership issues.”
From Digital health interventions for non-communicable disease management in primary health care in low-and middle-income countries (2023) · cites this paper as [41]
Suboptimal quality and accuracy for data input, report, and interpretation is a barrier to effective use of digital health.
“Suboptimal quality and accuracy for data input, report, and interpretation is a barrier to effective use of digital health.”
From Digital health interventions for non-communicable disease management in primary health care in low-and middle-income countries (2023) · cites this paper as [41]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 32 · Cited by 82
- Authors
- Ray, P., Liaw, S.-T., & Lewis, J.
- Affiliations
- UNSW Sydney (AU)
- Corresponding author
- Lewis, J.
- ORCID
- Ray, P.
- Venue
- Yearbook of Medical Informatics
- Publisher
- Georg Thieme Verlag KG
- Published
- 2016-08
- Volume
- 25
- Issue
- 01
- Pages
- 93-108
- ISSN
- 0943-4747 (ISSN-L)
- 2364-0502
- PMC
- PMC5171554
- OpenAlex
- W2554217696
- Cited by
- 82
- References
- 32
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 12 · 2022: 14 · 2021: 16 · 2020: 15 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 2
- FWCI
- 0.76
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- Yearbook of Medical Informatics (publishedVersion)
- Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- UNSWorks (UNSW Sydney) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- Funders
- University of New South Wales
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Mobile Health and mHealth Applications
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Telemedicine and Telehealth Implementation
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Innovation in Digital Healthcare Systems
- Keywords
- e-health, mobile health, cancer management, chronic disease management, mobile health apps, interoperability, health information management, regulatory challenges, telemedicine, online medical records
- MeSH terms
- Chronic Disease, Developing Countries, Health Policy, Humans, Neoplasms, Self Care, Telemedicine, Developed Countries, Education, Distance, Health Information Systems
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
