Mobile applications for sexual encounters accessed by men who have sex with men: Information on sexually transmitted infection.

We evaluated existing mobile applications (apps) on both Android and iOS (Apple) platforms that are used by men who have sex with men (MSM) to obtain sexual encounters. The word "gay" was used to search for apps in the Apple and Google Play virtual stores. The 10 most downloaded apps were analysed concerning safe sexual practices (SSP) messages. Out of 245 apps selected, 213 were evaluated - 102 for Android and 111 for iOS. Mostly social networks were accessed by MSM of which 112 allow access to people aged 14 and over. Most of the apps could be downloaded in more than two languages. Of the 10 most downloaded and evaluated apps, 5 had no HIV/STI and SSP messages, only 3 contained HIV/STI and SSP messages, and 2 had information about one or the other. Several social networking apps are available, however, there is no information on HIV/STI in the most accessed apps.

Use of dating sites and applications by women and their risk of sexually transmitted infections: a systematic review and meta-analysis protocol.

INTRODUCTION: The use of social networks has been increasing worldwide. Mobile websites and applications (apps) allow people to network more quickly and have more partners for sex. This can facilitate risky sexual behaviours, such as having multiple partners and unprotected sex, which can lead to a higher incidence of sexually transmitted infections. This systematic review/meta-analysis will assess the effects of the use of dating sites and apps by women on their level of engagement in risky sexual behaviours and their incidence of sexually transmitted infections. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The Cochrane Central Controlled Trials Registry, ClinicalTrials.gov, MEDLINE, Embase, SciELO, Web of Science, Scopus and Cumulative Index to Nursing & Allied Health Literature will be searched for cross-sectional studies, clinical trials and observational studies published between January 1990 and July 2020. This systematic review and meta-analysis will include studies investigating the use of mobile apps by women, risky sexual behaviour and sexually transmitted infections. The outcome will be an increase in new cases of sexually transmitted infections and HIV among women using dating sites and apps. Three independent reviewers will select the studies and extract data from the original articles. The risk of bias will be assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool and Risk Of Bias in Non-randomized Studies of Interventions. Data synthesis will be performed using Review Manager software (RevMan V.5.2.3). To assess heterogeneity, we will compute the I2 statistic. In addition, a quantitative synthesis will be carried out if the included studies are sufficiently homogeneous. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study will be a review of the published data, and thus ethical approval is not required. The findings of this systematic review will be published in a peer-reviewed journal. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42019120494.

Impact of mobile applications on adherence to cancer treatment: a systematic review and meta-analysis protocol.

INTRODUCTION: The number of patients taking oral chemotherapy is increasing around the world. It is essential to maximise the adherence to oral chemotherapy to improve the overall survival and life expectancy of the patients. In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we aim to evaluate the effectiveness of mobile applications in improving the adherence to oral chemotherapy and adjuvant hormonal therapy in cancer survivors. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: MEDLINE, Embase, LILACS, clinicaltrials.gov, Scopus and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials will be searched for randomised or quasi-experimental studies published between January 2009 and July 2019. This systematic review and meta-analysis will include studies investigating the use of mobile applications by cancer survivors to aid adherence to oral chemotherapy and adjuvant hormonal therapy. Patient education, reminder tools, calendars, pillboxes and electronic reminders will not be evaluated. The primary outcome will be the improvement in adherence to anticancer drugs. The secondary outcomes will be an improvement in the overall survival and life expectancy, improved quality of life and control of cancer-related symptoms. Three independent reviewers will select the studies and extract data from the original publications. The risk-of-bias will be assessed using the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool. Data synthesis will be performed using the Review Manager software (RevMan V.5.2.3). To assess heterogeneity, we will compute the I2 statistics. Additionally, a quantitative synthesis will be performed if the included studies are sufficiently homogenous. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study will be a review of the published data, and thus, ethical approval is not required. Findings of this systematic review will be published in a peer-reviewed journal. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42018102172.

Pain and quality of life in breast cancer patients.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the influence of pain on quality of life in breast cancer patients. METHODS: A cross-sectional study of 400 patients, including 118 without metastasis, 160 with loco-regional metastasis and 122 with distant metastasis. The instruments used were the European Organization for Research and Treatment for Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire-Core 30 and the Breast Cancer-specific 23 and short McGill Pain Questionnaire. RESULTS: In total, 71.7% of patients reported pain. The most frequent sensory descriptor used by patients was 'jumping.' In the evaluative dimension, the main descriptor chosen was troublesome. The Global Health self-assessment showed pain to be inversely correlated with quality of life: the group without metastasis had a mean score of 55.3 (SD=24.8) for those in pain, which rose to 69.7 (SD=19.2) for those without pain (p=0.001). Subjects with loco-regional metastasis had score of 59.1 (SD=21.3) when in pain, and those without pain had a significantly higher score of 72.4 (SD=18.6) (p<0.001). Patients from the distant metastasis group showed similar results with a mean score of 48.6 (SD=23.1) for those in pain and 67.6 (SD=20.4) for those without pain (p=0.002). Regarding the association of pain intensity and quality of life, patients with distant metastasis and intense pain had the worst scores for quality of life with a functional scale mean of 49.9 (SD=17.3) (p<0.009), a Symptom Scale score of 50.0 (SD=20.1) (p<0.001) and a Global Health Scale score of 39.7 (SD=24.7) (p<0.006). CONCLUSIONS: Pain compromises the quality of life of patients with breast cancer, particularly those with advanced stages of the disease.

Pain and quality of life in breast cancer patients

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the influence of pain on quality of life in breast cancer patients. METHODS: A cross-sectional study of 400 patients, including 118 without metastasis, 160 with loco-regional metastasis and 122 with distant metastasis. The instruments used were the European Organization for Research and Treatment for Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire-Core 30 and the Breast Cancer-specific 23 and short McGill Pain Questionnaire. RESULTS: In total, 71.7% of patients reported pain. The most frequent sensory descriptor used by patients was 'jumping.' In the evaluative dimension, the main descriptor chosen was troublesome. The Global Health self-assessment showed pain to be inversely correlated with quality of life: the group without metastasis had a mean score of 55.3 (SD=24.8) for those in pain, which rose to 69.7 (SD=19.2) for those without pain (p=0.001). Subjects with loco-regional metastasis had score of 59.1 (SD=21.3) when in pain, and those without pain had a significantly higher score of 72.4 (SD=18.6) (p<0.001). Patients from the distant metastasis group showed similar results with a mean score of 48.6 (SD=23.1) for those in pain and 67.6 (SD=20.4) for those without pain (p=0.002). Regarding the association of pain intensity and quality of life, patients with distant metastasis and intense pain had the worst scores for quality of life with a functional scale mean of 49.9 (SD=17.3) (p<0.009), a Symptom Scale score of 50.0 (SD=20.1) (p<0.001) and a Global Health Scale score of 39.7 (SD=24.7) (p<0.006). CONCLUSIONS: Pain compromises the quality of life of patients with breast cancer, particularly those with advanced stages of the disease.