The application and use of artificial intelligence in cancer nursing: A systematic review.

PURPOSE: Artificial Intelligence is being applied in oncology to improve patient and service outcomes. Yet, there is a limited understanding of how these advanced computational techniques are employed in cancer nursing to inform clinical practice. This review aimed to identify and synthesise evidence on artificial intelligence in cancer nursing. METHODS: CINAHL, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, and PubMed were searched using key terms between January 2010 and December 2022. Titles, abstracts, and then full texts were screened against eligibility criteria, resulting in twenty studies being included. Critical appraisal was undertaken, and relevant data extracted and analysed. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were followed. RESULTS: Artificial intelligence was used in numerous areas including breast, colorectal, liver, and ovarian cancer care among others. Algorithms were trained and tested on primary and secondary datasets to build predictive models of health problems related to cancer. Studies reported this led to improvements in the accuracy of predicting health outcomes or identifying variables that improved outcome prediction. While nurses led most studies, few deployed an artificial intelligence based digital tool with cancer nurses in a real-world setting as studies largely focused on developing and validating predictive models. CONCLUSION: Electronic cancer nursing datasets should be established to enable artificial intelligence techniques to be tested and if effective implemented in digital prediction and other AI-based tools. Cancer nurses need more education on machine learning and natural language processing, so they can lead and contribute to artificial intelligence developments in oncology.

Enhanced supportive care: prospective cohort study of oncology patients and caregivers.

OBJECTIVES: A prospective cohort study to evaluate clinical effectiveness of the enhanced supportive care (ESC) service at a comprehensive cancer centre and to explore the impact of the service on patient and caregiver outcomes and experience. METHODS: Patients who received care under the ESC service and their caregivers were eligible. Consented patients (n=184) and caregivers (n=67) completed questionnaires at baseline, 4 weeks and 8 weeks post-ESC. Patient questionnaires assessed quality of life (QOL), symptoms, experience of ESC and health service use. Caregiver questionnaires included QOL and needs assessment. Selected patients (n=13) participated in qualitative interviews. Quantitative analysis explored differences in questionnaire responses over time (p<0.05). Qualitative data were analysed thematically. RESULTS: Patient quantitative data showed improvements in QOL (p=0.004 for European Quality of Life Questionnaire 5 dimensions (EQ5D) health index scores) and anxiety (p=0.006) at 4 weeks, reduction in some symptoms (pain p=0.02 at 4 weeks), improvement in self-efficacy, an increase in problems being addressed and a decrease in health service use (reduction in outpatient appointments). Qualitative findings suggested patients were generally satisfied with the ESC service but identified areas for improvement such as increased awareness of ESC and earlier referral. Fewer improvements were noted for caregivers; however, they did report a decrease in unmet needs. CONCLUSION: The ESC service had a positive impact on various patient-reported and caregiver-reported outcomes. There were also positive impacts on health service use. Increasing awareness of ESC and engaging patients at an earlier stage in the disease trajectory may further improve patient satisfaction and outcomes.

Conducting a systematic review and evaluation of commercially available mobile applications (apps) on a health-related topic: the TECH approach and a step-by-step methodological guide.

OBJECTIVES: To provide an overview of the methodological considerations for conducting commercial smartphone health app reviews (mHealth reviews), with the aim of systematising the process and supporting high-quality evaluations of mHealth apps. DESIGN: Synthesis of our research team's experiences of conducting and publishing various reviews of mHealth apps available on app stores and hand-searching the top medical informatics journals (eg, The Lancet Digital Health, npj Digital Medicine, Journal of Biomedical Informatics and the Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association) over the last five years (2018-2022) to identify other app reviews to contribute to the discussion of this method and supporting framework for developing a research (review) question and determining the eligibility criteria. RESULTS: We present seven steps to support rigour in conducting reviews of health apps available on the app market: (1) writing a research question or aims, (2) conducting scoping searches and developing the protocol, (3) determining the eligibility criteria using the TECH framework, (4) conducting the final search and screening of health apps, (5) data extraction, (6) quality, functionality and other assessments and (7) analysis and synthesis of findings. We introduce the novel TECH approach to developing review questions and the eligibility criteria, which considers the Target user, Evaluation focus, Connectedness and the Health domain. Patient and public involvement and engagement opportunities are acknowledged, including co-developing the protocol and undertaking quality or usability assessments. CONCLUSION: Commercial mHealth app reviews can provide important insights into the health app market, including the availability of apps and their quality and functionality. We have outlined seven key steps for conducting rigorous health app reviews in addition to the TECH acronym, which can support researchers in writing research questions and determining the eligibility criteria. Future work will include a collaborative effort to develop reporting guidelines and a quality appraisal tool to ensure transparency and quality in systematic app reviews.

Digital interventions for genomics and genetics education, empowerment, and service engagement: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Patient-facing digital technologies may reduce barriers to and alleviate the burden on genetics services. However, no work has synthesised the evidence for patient-facing digital interventions for genomics/genetics education and empowerment, or to facilitate service engagement more broadly. It is also unclear which groups have been engaged by digital interventions. AIM: This systematic review explores which existing patient-facing digital technologies have been used for genomics/genetics education and empowerment, or to facilitate service engagement, and for whom and for which purposes the interventions have been developed. METHODS: The review adhered to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Eight databases were searched for literature. Information was extracted into an Excel sheet and analysed in a narrative manner. Quality assessments were conducted using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. RESULTS: Twenty-four studies were included, of which 21 were moderate or high quality. The majority (88%) were conducted in the United States of America or within a clinical setting (79%). More than half (63%) of the interventions were web-based tools, and almost all focussed on educating users (92%). There were promising results regarding educating patients and their families and facilitating engagement with genetics services. Few of the studies focussed on empowering patients or were community-based. CONCLUSION: Digital interventions may be used to deliver information about genetics concepts and conditions, and positively impact service engagement. However, there is insufficient evidence related to empowering patients and engaging underserved communities or consanguineous couples. Future work should focus on co-developing content with end users and incorporating interactive features.

Assessing the Acceptability of Home Blood Monitoring for Patients With Cancer Who Are Receiving Systemic Anticancer Therapy From a Patient, Caregiver, and Clinician Perspective: Focus Group and Interview Study.

BACKGROUND: Regular blood testing is an integral part of systemic anticancer therapy delivery. Blood tests are required before every administration of treatment to ensure that a patient is sufficiently well to receive it. Blood testing is burdensome for patients as they require either an extra visit within 48 hours of planned administration of treatment or a significantly long visit if performed on the day of treatment. The additional time for appointments can have a significant impact on the quality of life of someone who is living with cancer. In the United Kingdom, the COVID-19 pandemic created unprecedented disruption to the delivery of cancer care. Face-to-face hospital visits were reduced, resulting in the need to develop more innovative ways of working to minimize treatment interruptions. This led to significant uptake of digital technologies, with new models of care rapidly deployed across the UK health service to meet these challenges. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to explore the acceptability of a point-of-care home blood monitoring device for people with cancer who are receiving systemic anticancer therapy, which is being developed in response to the increased need for remote care for patients with cancer. METHODS: Qualitative focus groups and semistructured interviews were conducted with patients (23/47, 49%), caregivers (6/47, 13%), and health care professionals (18/47, 38%) over a 19-month time frame from May 2019 to December 2020. Data were analyzed using framework analysis guided by the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology model. RESULTS: Analysis identified 4 overarching themes: performance expectancy, effort expectancy, social influence, and facilitating conditions. CONCLUSIONS: This study found that patients with cancer, their caregivers, and health care professionals had positive perceptions about home blood monitoring. Although they are often considered synonymously, self-testing and self-management are not mutually exclusive, and this study illustrated some disparity in opinions regarding patient self-management. Home blood monitoring has the potential to provide patients with cancer with a convenient option for blood monitoring. It would minimize hospital attendances, decrease late treatment deferrals, and provide prompt recognition of cancer treatment toxicities, thus enhancing the existing nurse-led protocols and clinical pathways. Home blood monitoring would create a long-term sustainable transformation for the delivery of cancer care, using digital health to act as a facilitator to address a pertinent issue regarding improving the efficiency of hospital resources and increasing the delivery of personalized patient care. Further studies are needed to determine how and where home blood monitoring would fit within clinical pathways, in a way that is robust and equitable.

Patient-facing cancer mobile apps that enable patient reported outcome data to be collected: A systematic review of content, functionality, quality, and ability to integrate with electronic health records.

PURPOSE: Enabling cancer patients to self-manage symptoms through mobile applications can result in more informed, autonomous patients who are partners in their care, consequently reducing the burden on health services. Electronic patient reported outcomes completed before a clinical review can increase the frequency and quality of holistic assessments, while integration into electronic health records can maximise clinical utility. The ability of apps to integrate with electronic health records is key to providing a real-time interface between patient reports and healthcare response. This review identifies patient-facing cancer apps which can record patient reported outcomes, and explores their purpose, functionality, quality, and ability to integrate with electronic health records. METHODS: A systematic app review and content synthesis was conducted on patient-facing cancer apps available in the United Kingdom. Where applicable, the review aligned with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and meta-Analysis. Two validated scales assessed functionality and quality: The IMS Institute for Healthcare Informatics functionality score and the Mobile App Rating Scale. Flesch-Kincaid metrics explored readability. RESULTS: Apple App and Google Play stores identified 405 apps, of which 12 met the eligibility criteria. All were free to download, 1 (8%) had in-app purchases/subscriptions. Nine (75%) were affiliated with a professional health body/charity. Six (50%) analysed inputted data and provided medical advice based on answers. The average Flesch Reading Ease score was 42.7 out of 100. The apps had an average of 7.3 functions each and a mean MARS score of 4/5. None integrated with electronic health records. CONCLUSION: While many cancer apps exist, few enable patient reported outcomes to be recorded and shared with clinicians in real-time. Further research is warranted to explore the feasibility of integrating with electronic health records, as this function can improve patient experience and outcomes, and increase efficiency of hospital resources through more proactive care.

Patient-facing genetic and genomic mobile apps in the UK: a systematic review of content, functionality, and quality.

Close relative (consanguineous) marriage is widely practised globally, and it increases the risk of genetic disorders. Mobile apps may increase awareness and education regarding the associated risks in a sensitive, engaging, and accessible manner. This systematic review of patient-facing genetic/genomic mobile apps explores content, function, and quality. We searched the NHS Apps Library and the UK Google Play and Apple App stores for patient-facing genomic/genetic smartphone apps. Descriptive information and information on content was extracted and summarized. Readability was examined using the Flesch-Kincaid metrics. Two raters assessed each app, using the Mobile App Rating Scale (MARS) and the IMS Institute for Healthcare Informatics functionality score. A total of 754 apps were identified, of which 22 met the eligibility criteria. All apps intended to inform/educate users, while 32% analyzed genetic data, and 18% helped to diagnose genetic conditions. Most (68%) were clearly about genetics, but only 14% were affiliated with a medical/health body or charity, and only 36% had a privacy strategy. Mean reading scores were 35 (of 100), with the average reading age being equivalent to US grade 12 (UK year 13). On average, apps had 3.3 of the 11 IMS functionality criteria. The mean MARS quality score was 3.2 ± 0.7. Half met the minimum acceptability score (3 of 5). None had been formally evaluated. It was evident that there are few high-quality genomic/genetic patient-facing apps available in the UK. This demonstrates a need for an accessible, culturally sensitive, evidence-based app to improve genetic literacy within patient populations and specific communities.