Cargando…
Do prostate cancer-related mobile phone apps have a role in contemporary prostate cancer management? A systematic review by EAU young academic urologists (YAU) urotechnology group
AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: To review the available literature regarding the use of prostate cancer-related mobile phone applications (PCA). MATERIALS AND METHODS: The search was for English language articles between inceptions of databases to June 2019. Medline, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, CINAHL and Web of...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7508932/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32322996 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00345-020-03197-w |
Sumario: | AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: To review the available literature regarding the use of prostate cancer-related mobile phone applications (PCA). MATERIALS AND METHODS: The search was for English language articles between inceptions of databases to June 2019. Medline, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, CINAHL and Web of Science were searched. Full-text articles were reviewed, and the following data were extracted to aid with app analysis: name of application, developer, platform (Apple App Store or Google Play Store) and factors assessed by the article. RESULTS: The search yielded 1825 results of which 13 studies were included in the final review. 44 PCAs were identified from the data collected of which 59% of the PCAs had an educational focus. 11 apps were inactive and 5 weren’t updated within the last year. Five studies focused on the development and testing of apps (MyHealthAvatar, CPC, Rotterdam, Interaktor, NED). Two studies evaluated the readability of PCAs. Most PCAs had a reading level greater than that of the average patient. Two studies evaluated the quality and accuracy of apps. Majority of PCAs were accurate with a wide range of information. The study reported most PCAs to have deficient or insufficient scores for data protection. Two studies evaluated the accuracy of Rotterdam, CORAL and CPC risk calculators. Rotterdam was the best performer. CONCLUSIONS: PCAs are currently in its infancy and do require further development before widespread integration into existing clinical practise. There are concerns with data protection, high readability standards and lack of information update in current PCAs. If developed appropriately with responsible governance, they do have the potential to play important roles in modern-day prostate cancer management |
---|