Pediatric Cancer Communication on Twitter: Natural Language Processing and Qualitative Content Analysis.

BACKGROUND: During the COVID-19 pandemic, Twitter (recently rebranded as "X") was the most widely used social media platform with over 2 million cancer-related tweets. The increasing use of social media among patients and family members, providers, and organizations has allowed for novel methods of studying cancer communication. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to examine pediatric cancer-related tweets to capture the experiences of patients and survivors of cancer, their caregivers, medical providers, and other stakeholders. We assessed the public sentiment and content of tweets related to pediatric cancer over a time period representative of the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: All English-language tweets related to pediatric cancer posted from December 11, 2019, to May 7, 2022, globally, were obtained using the Twitter application programming interface. Sentiment analyses were computed based on Bing, AFINN, and NRC lexicons. We conducted a supplemental nonlexicon-based sentiment analysis with ChatGPT (version 3.0) to validate our findings with a random subset of 150 tweets. We conducted a qualitative content analysis to manually code the content of a random subset of 800 tweets. RESULTS: A total of 161,135 unique tweets related to pediatric cancer were identified. Sentiment analyses showed that there were more positive words than negative words. Via the Bing lexicon, the most common positive words were support, love, amazing, heaven, and happy, and the most common negative words were grief, risk, hard, abuse, and miss. Via the NRC lexicon, most tweets were categorized under sentiment types of positive, trust, and joy. Overall positive sentiment was consistent across lexicons and confirmed with supplemental ChatGPT (version 3.0) analysis. Percent agreement between raters for qualitative coding was 91%, and the top 10 codes were awareness, personal experiences, research, caregiver experiences, patient experiences, policy and the law, treatment, end of life, pharmaceuticals and drugs, and survivorship. Qualitative content analysis showed that Twitter users commonly used the social media platform to promote public awareness of pediatric cancer and to share personal experiences with pediatric cancer from the perspective of patients or survivors and their caregivers. Twitter was frequently used for health knowledge dissemination of research findings and federal policies that support treatment and affordable medical care. CONCLUSIONS: Twitter may serve as an effective means for researchers to examine pediatric cancer communication and public sentiment around the globe. Despite the public mental health crisis during the COVID-19 pandemic, overall sentiments of pediatric cancer-related tweets were positive. Content of pediatric cancer tweets focused on health and treatment information, social support, and raising awareness of pediatric cancer.

Protocol for the promoting resilience in stress management (PRISM) intervention: a multi-site randomized controlled trial for adolescents and young adults with advanced cancer.

BACKGROUND: Adolescents and young adults (AYAs) with cancer are at high risk of poor psychosocial outcomes, and evidence-based interventions designed to meet their psychosocial and communication needs are lacking. The main objective of this project is to test the efficacy of a new adaptation of the Promoting Resilience in Stress Management intervention for AYAs with Advanced Cancer (PRISM-AC). METHODS/DESIGN: The PRISM-AC trial is a 2-arm, parallel, non-blinded, multisite, randomized controlled trial. 144 participants with advanced cancer will be enrolled and randomized to either usual, non-directive, supportive care without PRISM-AC ("control" arm) or with PRISM-AC ("experimental" arm). PRISM is a manualized, skills-based training program comprised of four 30-60 min, one-on-one sessions targeting AYA-endorsed resilience resources (stress-management, goal-setting, cognitive-reframing, and meaning-making). It also includes a facilitated family meeting and a fully equipped smartphone app. The current adaptation includes an embedded advance care planning module. English- or Spanish-speaking individuals 12-24 years old with advanced cancer (defined as progressive, recurrent, or refractory disease, or any diagnosis associated with < 50% survival) receiving care at 4 academic medical centers are eligible. Patients' caregivers are also eligible to participate in this study if they are able to speak and read English or Spanish, and are cognitively and physically able to participate. Participants in all groups complete surveys querying patient-reported outcomes at the time of enrollment and 3-, 6-, 9-, and 12-months post-enrollment. The primary outcome of interest is patient-reported health-related quality of life (HRQOL) and secondary outcomes of interest include patient anxiety, depression, resilience, hope and symptom burden, parent/caregiver anxiety, depression and health-related quality of life, and family palliative care activation. We will conduct intention-to-treat analysis to compare the group means of primary and secondary outcomes between PRISM-AC arm and control arm with regression models. DISCUSSION: This study will provide methodologically rigorous data and evidence regarding a novel intervention to promote resilience and reduce distress among AYAs with advanced cancer. This research has the potential to offer a practical, skills-based curriculum designed to improve outcomes for this high-risk group. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT03668223, September 12, 2018.

Protocol for The Promoting Resilience in Stress Management (PRISM) Intervention: a multi-site randomized controlled trial for adolescents and young adults with advanced cancer.

Background Adolescents and young adults (AYAs) with cancer are at high risk of poor psychosocial outcomes, and evidence-based interventions designed to meet their psychosocial and communication needs are lacking. The main objective of this project is to test the efficacy of a new adaptation of the Promoting Resilience in Stress Management intervention for AYAs with Advanced Cancer (PRISM-AC). Methods/design: The PRISM-AC trial is a 2-arm, parallel, non-blinded, multisite, randomized controlled trial. 144 participants with advanced cancer will be enrolled and randomized to either usual, non-directive, supportive care without PRISM-AC ("control" arm) or with PRISM-AC ("experimental" arm). PRISM is a manualized, skills-based training program comprised of four 30-60 minute, one-on-one sessions targeting AYA-endorsed resilience resources (stress-management, goal-setting, cognitive-reframing, and meaning-making). It also includes a facilitated family meeting and a fully equipped smartphone app. The current adaptation includes an embedded advance care planning module. English- or Spanish-speaking individuals 12-24 years old with advanced cancer (defined as progressive, recurrent, or refractory disease, or any diagnosis associated with < 50% survival) receiving care at 4 academic medical centers are eligible. Patients' caregivers are also eligible to participate in this study if they are able to speak and read English or Spanish, and are cognitively and physically able to participate. Participants in all groups complete surveys querying patient-reported outcomes at the time of enrollment and 3-, 6-, 9-, and 12-months post-enrollment. The primary outcome of interest is patient-reported health-related quality of life (HRQOL) and secondary outcomes of interest include patient anxiety, depression, resilience, hope and symptom burden, parent/caregiver anxiety, depression and health-related quality of life, and family palliative care activation. We will conduct intention-to-treat analysis to compare the group means of primary and secondary outcomes between PRISM-AC arm and control arm with regression models. Discussion This study will provide methodologically rigorous data and evidence regarding a novel intervention to promote resilience and reduce distress among AYAs with advanced cancer. This research has the potential to offer a practical, skills-based curriculum designed to improve outcomes for this high-risk group. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT03668223, September 12, 2018.

Feasibility and Acceptability of the Promoting Resilience in Stress Management-Parent (PRISM-P) Intervention for Caregivers of Children with Craniofacial Conditions.

OBJECTIVES: Few evidence-based psychosocial programs exist within craniofacial care. This study (a) assessed feasibility and acceptability of the Promoting Resilience in Stress Management-Parent (PRISM-P) intervention among caregivers of children with craniofacial conditions and (b) described barriers and facilitators of caregiver resilience to inform program adaptation. DESIGN: In this single-arm cohort study, participants completed a baseline demographic questionnaire, the PRISM-P program, and an exit interview. PARTICIPANTS: Eligible individuals were English-speaking legal guardians of a child <12-years-old with a craniofacial condition. INTERVENTION: PRISM-P included 4 modules (stress-management, goal-setting, cognitive-restructuring, meaning-making) delivered in 2 one-on-one phone or videoconference sessions 1-2 weeks apart. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Feasibility was defined as >70% program completion among enrolled participants; acceptability was defined as >70% willingness to recommend PRISM-P. Intervention feedback and caregiver-perceived barriers and facilitators of resilience were summarized qualitatively. RESULTS: Twenty caregivers were approached and 12 (60%) enrolled. The majority were mothers (67%) of a child <1-year-old diagnosed with a cleft lip and/or palate (83%) or craniofacial microsomia (17%). Of these, 8 (67%) completed PRISM-P and 7 (58%) completed interviews; 4 (33%) were lost-to-follow-up before PRISM-P and 1 (8%) before the interview. Feedback was highly positive, with 100% willing to recommend PRISM-P. Perceived barriers to resilience included uncertainty about their child's health; facilitators included social support, parental identity, knowledge, and control. CONCLUSIONS: PRISM-P was acceptable among caregivers of children with craniofacial conditions but not feasible based on program completion rates. Barriers and facilitators of resilience support the appropriateness of PRISM-P for this population and inform adaptation.

Efficacy and Conflicts of Interest in Randomized Controlled Trials Evaluating Headspace and Calm Apps: Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Although there are thousands of mental health apps, 2 apps, Headspace and Calm, claim a large percentage of the marketplace. These two mindfulness and meditation apps have reached tens of millions of active users. To guide consumers, clinicians, and researchers, we performed a systematic review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of Headspace and Calm. OBJECTIVE: Our study aimed to evaluate intervention efficacy, risk of bias, and conflicts of interest (COIs) in the evidence base for Headspace and Calm, the two most popular mental health apps at the time of our search. METHODS: To identify studies, we searched academic databases (Google Scholar, MEDLINE, and PsycINFO) and the websites of Headspace and Calm in May 2021 for RCTs of Headspace and Calm testing efficacy via original data collection, published in English in peer-reviewed journals. For each study, we coded (1) study characteristics (eg, participants, sample size, and outcome measures), (2) intervention characteristics (eg, free vs paid version of the app and intended frequency of app usage), (3) all study outcomes, (4) Cochrane risk of bias variables, and (5) COI variables (eg, presence or absence of a preregistration and the presence or absence of a COI statement involving the company). RESULTS: We identified 14 RCTs of Headspace and 1 RCT of Calm. Overall, 93% (13/14) of RCTs of Headspace and 100% (1/1) of RCTs of Calm recruited participants from a nonclinical population. Studies commonly measured mindfulness, well-being, stress, depressive symptoms, and anxiety symptoms. Headspace use improved depression in 75% of studies that evaluated it as an outcome. Findings were mixed for mindfulness, well-being, stress, and anxiety, but at least 40% of studies showed improvement for each of these outcomes. Studies were generally underpowered to detect "small" or "medium" effect sizes. Furthermore, 50% (7/14) of RCTs of Headspace and 0% (0/1) of RCTs of Calm reported a COI that involved Headspace or Calm (the companies). The most common COI was the app company providing premium app access for free for participants, and notably, 14% (2/14) of RCTs of Headspace reported Headspace employee involvement in study design, execution, and data analysis. Only 36% (5/14) of RCTs of Headspace were preregistered, and the 1 RCT of Calm was not preregistered. CONCLUSIONS: The empirical research on Headspace appears promising, whereas there is an absence of randomized trials on Calm. Limitations of this study include an inability to compare Headspace and Calm owing to the dearth of RCTs studying Calm and the reliance on author reports to evaluate COIs. When determining whether or not mental health apps are of high quality, identification of high-quality apps and evaluation of their effectiveness and investigators' COIs should be ensured.

Assessment of Resilience Training for Hospital Employees in the Era of COVID-19.

Importance: Health care workers face serious mental health challenges as a result of ongoing work stress. The COVID-19 pandemic exacerbated that stress, resulting in high rates of anxiety, depression, and burnout. To date, few evidence-based programs targeting mental health outcomes in health care workers have been described. Objective: To assess the feasibility, acceptability, and preliminary outcomes of a skills-based coaching program designed to reduce stress and build resilience. Design, Setting, and Participants: A pilot cohort study was conducted between September 2020 and April 2021 using preprogram and postprogram assessments and a mixed-methods analysis. Duration of follow-up was 7 weeks. The coaching program was delivered via video conferencing. Participants were health care workers and staff from a large urban health system. Intervention: The Promoting Resilience in Stress Management (PRISM) program, a manualized, skills-based coaching program originally developed for adolescents and young adults with serious/chronic illness, was adapted to support health care workers and staff ("PRISM at Work"). It included 6 weekly 1-hour group sessions. Main Outcomes and Measures: Feasibility was defined a priori as 70% completion rates. Acceptability was defined quantitatively (satisfaction scores) and qualitatively (open-ended questions regarding experience with program). Preliminary outcomes were assessed with preprogram and post program assessments of self-reported resilience, stress, anxiety, and burnout using validated instruments. Descriptive statistics summarized demographic variables and feasibility and acceptability. Linear mixed effects regression models examined preliminary outcomes, controlling for relevant covariates. Results: A total of 153 participants (median [SD] age, 40.6 [10.1] years; 142 [92%] were female; 128 [84%] identified as having White race; 81 [53%] were in patient-facing roles) enrolled. Of the 132 health care workers who provided follow-up surveys, 120 (91%) had completed the program, and 116 (88%) reported being satisfied. Answers to open-ended questions suggested that participants wanted more PRISM either with longer or additional sessions. Participant-reported resilience (ß = 1.74; 95% CI, 1.00-2.48), stress (ß = -2.40; 95% CI, -3.28 to -1.51), anxiety (ß = -2.04; 95% CI, -2.74 to -1.34), and burnout-exhaustion (ß = -0.37; 95% CI, -0.56 to -0.18) improved after the program. Conclusions and Relevance: Results of this study suggest that PRISM at Work may have utility for health care workers and staff in that the program was found to be feasible, acceptable, and associated with improved outcomes.

Quality of Life in Adolescents and Young Adults: The Role of Symptom Burden.

CONTEXT: Adolescents and young adults (AYAs) with cancer report worse health-related quality of life (HRQOL) than other age groups. Symptom burden is a modifiable predictor of HRQOL. OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to identify which symptoms are most burdensome to AYAs with advanced cancer. METHODS: In this observational study, English-speaking individuals aged 12-25 years undergoing treatment for advanced cancer completed assessments of symptom burden (Memorial Symptom Assessment Scale) and HRQOL (Pediatric Quality of Life Inventory Generic Form and Cancer Module; minimal clinically important difference 4.4). We dichotomized participants as having low (<7) or high (≥7) symptom prevalence. Mixed regression models estimated HRQOL differences between groups. For individual symptoms, unadjusted mixed models estimated HRQOL reductions. RESULTS: N = 58 AYAs completed baseline surveys. The median age was 17 years (IQR 15-19), 58% were male, 59% identified as white, and 44% were diagnosed with leukemia/lymphoma. High symptom prevalence was associated with a mean generic HRQOL 7 points lower (95% CI: -11, -3; P < 0.01) and cancer-specific HRQOL score 12 points lower (95% CI: -17, -7; P < 0.01) than low symptom prevalence. The most prevalent symptoms were fatigue (71%), pain (58%), and difficulty sleeping (58%). Fatigue (-8), difficulty concentrating (-7), and mouth sores (-6) were associated with the greatest generic HRQOL score reductions. Dysphagia (-12), difficulty concentrating (-12), and sadness (-11) were associated with the greatest cancer-specific HRQOL score reductions. CONCLUSION: The symptom experience among AYAs with advanced cancer is unique. Separate evaluation of AYA's symptoms may optimize management and improve HRQOL.

Assessment of the Promoting Resilience in Stress Management Intervention for Adolescent and Young Adult Survivors of Cancer at 2 Years: Secondary Analysis of a Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Adolescents and young adults (AYAs) with cancer have a high risk of poor psychosocial outcomes. The Promoting Resilience in Stress Management (PRISM) intervention is one of few psychosocial interventions targeting younger people with cancer that has demonstrated efficacy in a randomized clinical trial. Objective: To explore 2-year trajectories of patient-reported well-being among AYA cancer survivors. The hypothesis was that AYAs who initially responded to PRISM would report sustained positive changes. Design, Setting, and Participants: This secondary analysis of data from a single-center, parallel, phase 2 randomized clinical trial was conducted from January 2015 to October 2016. Eligible participants were English-speaking AYAs between ages 13 and 25 years with cancer treated at a single, quaternary children's hospital in the US. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to PRISM or usual care. Data were analyzed between March 2021 and June 2021. Intervention: PRISM is a brief, skills-based coaching program targeting 4 resilience resources (stress management, goal setting, cognitive reframing, and meaning making). Main Outcomes and Measures: Patient-reported cancer-related quality of life (QoL) (PedsQL scale), hope (Hope scale), resilience (Connor-Davidson Resilience scale), and psychological distress (Kessler-6 scale) were collected at baseline, 6, 12, and 24 months. Data from AYAs who remained alive at 24 months were analyzed. Improvement was defined as a positive change in instrument scores between baseline and 6 months (ie, the end of the PRISM program) and used linear mixed effects regression to assess changes over time. Results: A total of 57 AYAs were included in analysis at 24 months (62% of 92 randomized). Twenty-six participants (46%) were female; 36 (63%) were between ages 13 and 17 years; and 20 (35%) identified as part of a racial or ethnic minority group (4 [7%] Asian, 11 [19%] Hispanic or Latino, 16 [28%] mixed race or other). PRISM was associated with improved QoL, hope, resilience, and distress between baseline and 6 months, and these associations were sustained for QoL over 12 months (ß = 7.4; 95% CI, 0.8 to 14; P = .03) and hope throughout the study period (12 months: ß = 6.2; 95% CI, 2.7 to 9.6; P < .001; 24 months: ß = 4.6; 95% CI, 1 to 8.3; P = .01). Of those whose scores improved between baseline and 6 months, PRISM participants more commonly reported sustained improvements in QoL (16 of 21 participants [76%] vs 8 of 17 [47%]), hope (14 of 24 participants [58%] vs 6 of 14 [43%]), resilience (9 of 18 participants [50%] vs 4 of 14 [29%]), and distress (14 of 19 participants [74%] vs 6 of 19 [32%]) at 24 months compared with usual care. Conclusions and Relevance: These results suggest that PRISM was associated with sustained improvements in psychosocial outcomes as reported by adolescents and young adults. Those who responded to PRISM in the first 6 months reported continued well-being 2 years later. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02340884.

Telemental Health For Youth With Chronic Illnesses: Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Children, adolescents, and young adults with chronic conditions experience difficulties coping with disease-related stressors, comorbid mental health problems, and decreased quality of life. The COVID-19 pandemic has led to a global mental health crisis, and telemental health has necessarily displaced in-person care. However, it remains unknown whether such remote interventions are feasible or efficacious. We aimed to fill this research-practice gap. OBJECTIVE: In this systematic review, we present a synthesis of studies examining the feasibility and efficacy of telemental health interventions for youth aged ≤25 years with chronic illnesses. METHODS: PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, PsycInfo, and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews were searched from 2008 to 2020. We included experimental, quasiexperimental, and observational studies of telemental health interventions designed for children, adolescents, and young adults aged ≤25 years with chronic illnesses, in which feasibility or efficacy outcomes were measured. Only English-language publications in peer-reviewed journals were included. We excluded studies of interventions for caregivers or health care providers, mental health problems not in the context of a chronic illness, disease and medication management, and prevention programs for healthy individuals. RESULTS: We screened 2154 unique study records and 109 relevant full-text articles. Twelve studies met the inclusion criteria, and they represented seven unique telemental health interventions. Five of the studies included feasibility outcomes and seven included efficacy outcomes. All but two studies were pilot studies with relatively small sample sizes. Most interventions were based on cognitive behavioral therapy and problem-solving therapy. The subset of studies examining intervention feasibility concluded that telemental health interventions were appropriate, acceptable, and satisfactory to patients and their parents. Technology did not create barriers in access to care. For the subset of efficacy studies, evidence in support of the efficacy of telemental health was mixed. Significant heterogeneity in treatment type, medical diagnoses, and outcomes precluded a meta-analysis. CONCLUSIONS: The state of the science for telemental health interventions designed for youth with chronic illnesses is in a nascent stage. Early evidence supports the feasibility of telehealth-based delivery of traditional in-person interventions. Few studies have assessed efficacy, and current findings are mixed. Future research should continue to evaluate whether telemental health may serve as a sustainable alternative to in-person care after the COVID pandemic.

Popular Evidence-Based Commercial Mental Health Apps: Analysis of Engagement, Functionality, Aesthetics, and Information Quality.

BACKGROUND: There is a robust market for mobile health (mHealth) apps focused on self-guided interventions to address a high prevalence of mental health disorders and behavioral health needs in the general population. Disseminating mental health interventions via mHealth technologies may help overcome barriers in access to care and has broad consumer appeal. However, development and testing of mental health apps in formal research settings are limited and far outpaced by everyday consumer use. In addition to prioritizing efficacy and effectiveness testing, researchers should examine and test app design elements that impact the user experience, increase engagement, and lead to sustained use over time. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the objective and subjective quality of apps that are successful across both research and consumer sectors, and the relationships between objective app quality, subjective user ratings, and evidence-based behavior change techniques. This will help inform user-centered design considerations for mHealth researchers to maximize design elements and features associated with consumer appeal, engagement, and sustainability. METHODS: We conducted a user-centered design analysis of popular consumer apps with scientific backing utilizing the well-validated Mobile Application Rating Scale (MARS). Popular consumer apps with research support were identified via a systematic search of the App Store iOS (Apple Inc) and Google Play (Google LLC) and literature review. We evaluated the quality metrics of 19 mental health apps along 4 MARS subscales, namely, Engagement, Functionality, Aesthetics, and Information Quality. MARS total and subscale scores range from 1 to 5, with higher scores representing better quality. We then extracted user ratings from app download platforms and coded apps for evidence-based treatment components. We calculated Pearson correlation coefficients to identify associations between MARS scores, App Store iOS/Google Play consumer ratings, and number of evidence-based treatment components. RESULTS: The mean MARS score was 3.52 (SD 0.71), consumer rating was 4.22 (SD 0.54), and number of evidence-based treatment components was 2.32 (SD 1.42). Consumer ratings were significantly correlated with the MARS Functionality subscale (r=0.74, P<.001), Aesthetics subscale (r=0.70, P<.01), and total score (r=0.58, P=.01). Number of evidence-based intervention components was not associated with MARS scores (r=0.085, P=.73) or consumer ratings (r=-0.329, P=.16). CONCLUSIONS: In our analysis of popular research-supported consumer apps, objective app quality and subjective consumer ratings were generally high. App functionality and aesthetics were highly consistent with consumer appeal, whereas evidence-based components were not. In addition to designing treatments that work, we recommend that researchers prioritize aspects of app design that impact the user experience for engagement and sustainability (eg, ease of use, navigation, visual appeal). This will help translate evidence-based interventions to the competitive consumer app market, thus bridging the gap between research development and real-world implementation.

Goldilocks and the Three Bears: A Just-Right Hybrid Model to Synthesize the Growing Landscape of Publicly Available Health-Related Mobile Apps.

Mobile health (mHealth) technologies have provided an innovative platform for the deployment of health care diagnostics, symptom monitoring, and prevention and intervention programs. Such health-related smartphone apps are universally accepted by patients and providers with over 50 million users worldwide. Despite the rise in popularity and accessibility among consumers, the evidence base in support of health-related apps has fallen well behind the rapid pace of industry development. To bridge this evidence gap, researchers are beginning to consider how to best apply evidence-based research standards to the systematic synthesis of the mHealth consumer market. In this viewpoint, we argue for the adoption of a "hybrid model" that combines a traditional systematic review with a systematic search of mobile app download platforms for health sciences researchers interested in synthesizing the state of the science of consumer apps. This approach, which we have successfully executed in a recent review, maximizes the benefits of traditional and novel approaches to address the essential question of whether popular consumer mHealth apps work.

Adverse childhood experiences (ACEs) and medically traumatic events (TEs) in adolescents and young adults (AYAs) with cancer: a report from the Promoting Resilience in Stress Management (PRISM) randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: In adolescents and young adults (AYAs) with cancer, we examined (1) the distribution and type of traumatic events (TEs) experienced prior to baseline assessment and (2) how a resilience intervention, Promoting Resilience in Stress Management (PRISM), impacted changes in patient-reported outcomes (PROs) for AYAs with and without TEs. METHODS: AYAs (12-25 years) within 1-10 weeks of diagnosis of new malignancy or ever diagnosed with advanced cancer were enrolled and randomly assigned to usual care (UC) with or without PRISM. To assess TEs, we screened medical records for traditionally defined adverse childhood experiences (ACEs) and medical traumatic events. Age-validated PROs assessed resilience, benefit-finding, hope, generic health-related quality of life (QoL), cancer-specific QoL, depression, and anxiety at enrollment and 6 months later. We calculated effect sizes (Cohen's d) for PRISM vs. UC effect on PRO score change at 6 months for 1+ TEs and 0 TE groups. RESULTS: Ninety-two AYAs enrolled and completed baseline surveys (44-UC, 48-PRISM; N = 74 at 6 months, 38-UC, 36-PRISM); 60% experienced 1+ TEs. PROs at baseline were similar across groups. PRISM's effect on score change was greater (Cohen's d ≥ 0.5) for the 1+ TE group on domains of benefit-finding and hope; and similar (d < 0.5) on domains of resilience, depression, anxiety, and both generic and cancer-specific QoL. CONCLUSIONS: In AYAs with cancer, TEs occurred at similar rates as the general population. PRISM may be particularly helpful for improving benefit-finding and hope for those who have experienced TEs.

eHealth and mHealth Psychosocial Interventions for Youths With Chronic Illnesses: Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: An estimated 12.8% of children and adolescents experience chronic health conditions that lead to poor quality of life, adjustment and coping issues, and concurrent mental health problems. Digital health deployment of psychosocial interventions to support youth with chronic illness has become increasingly popular with the advent of the technological advances in the digital age. OBJECTIVE: Our objectives were to systematically review published efficacy studies of eHealth and mHealth (mobile health) psychosocial interventions for youths with chronic illnesses and review intervention theory and treatment components. METHODS: PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, PsycInfo, and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews were searched for studies published from 2008 to 2019 of eHealth and mHealth psychosocial interventions designed for children and adolescents with chronic illnesses in which efficacy outcomes were reported. We excluded studies of interventions for caregivers, healthy youth, disease and medication management, and telehealth interventions that function solely as a platform to connect patients to providers via phone, text, or videoconference. RESULTS: We screened 2551 articles and 133 relevant full-text articles. Sixteen efficacy studies with psychosocial and health outcomes representing 12 unique interventions met the inclusion criteria. Of the included studies, 12 were randomized controlled trials and 4 were prospective cohort studies with no comparison group. Most interventions were based in cognitive behavioral theory and designed as eHealth interventions; only 2 were designed as mHealth interventions. All but 2 interventions provided access to support staff via text, phone, email, or discussion forums. The significant heterogeneity in intervention content, intervention structure, medical diagnoses, and outcomes precluded meta-analysis. For example, measurement time points ranged from immediately postcompletion of the mHealth program to 18 months later, and we identified 39 unique outcomes of interest. The majority of included studies (11/16, 69%) reported significant changes in measured health and/or psychosocial posttreatment outcomes, with small to large effect sizes. CONCLUSIONS: Although the available literature on the efficacy of eHealth and mHealth psychosocial interventions for youth with chronic illnesses is limited, preliminary research suggests some evidence of positive treatment responses. Future studies should continue to evaluate whether digital health platforms may be a viable alternative model of delivery to traditional face-to-face approaches.

Android and iPhone Mobile Apps for Psychosocial Wellness and Stress Management: Systematic Search in App Stores and Literature Review.

BACKGROUND: In an oversaturated market of publicly available mobile apps for psychosocial self-care and stress management, health care providers, patients, and consumers interested in mental health-related apps may wonder which, if any, are efficacious. Readily available metrics for consumers include user popularity and media buzz rather than scientific evidence. OBJECTIVE: This systematic review aimed to (1) examine the breadth of therapeutic contents and features of psychosocial wellness and stress management apps available to self-help seekers for public download and (2) determine which of these apps have original research support. METHODS: First, we conducted a systematic review of publicly available apps on the iPhone App Store (Apple Inc) and Android Google Play (Google LLC) platforms using conventional self-help-seeking search terms related to wellness and stress. The results were limited to English-language apps available for free download. In total, 2 reviewers independently evaluated all apps and discussed the findings to reach 100% consensus regarding inclusion. Second, a literature review was conducted on the included apps to identify supporting studies with original data collection. RESULTS: We screened 3287 apps and found 1009 psychosocial wellness and stress management apps. Content varied widely. The most common evidence-based strategy was mindfulness-meditation, followed by positive psychology and goal setting. Most apps were intended to be used as self-help interventions, with only 1.09% (11/1009) involving an electronic therapist and 1.88% (19/1009) designed as a supplement to in-person psychotherapy. Only 4.66% (47/1009) of apps targeted individuals with psychological disorders, and less than 1% of apps (6/1009, 0.59%) targeted individuals with other chronic illnesses. Approximately 2% (21/1009, 2.08%) were supported by original research publications, with a total of 25 efficacy studies and 10 feasibility studies. The Headspace mindfulness app had the most evidence, including 8 efficacy studies. Most other scientifically backed apps were supported by a single feasibility or efficacy study. CONCLUSIONS: Only 2.08% (21/1009) of publicly available psychosocial wellness and stress management mobile apps discoverable to self-help seekers have published, peer-reviewed evidence of feasibility and/or efficacy. Clinicians and investigators may use these findings to help patients and families navigate the volume of emerging digital health interventions for stress management and wellness.