JMIR Publications

ABSTRACT

Background:

The advancement of information and communication technologies has spurred a growing interest in and increased applications of patient-generated health data (PGHD). In particular, PGHD may be promising for older adults with cancer who have increased survival rates and experience a variety of symptoms.

Objective:

This scoping review aimed to identify the characteristics of research on PGHD as applied to older adults with cancer and to assess the current utilization of PGHD.

Methods:

Guided by Arksey and O'Malley and the JBI Methodology for Scoping Reviews, six electronic databases were searched: PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, Cochrane Library, Scopus, and Web of Science. In addition, the reference lists of the selected studies were screened to identify gray literature. The researchers independently screened the literature according to the predefined eligibility criteria. Data from the selected studies were extracted, capturing study, participant, and PGHD characteristics.

Results:

Of the 1,090 identified studies, 88 were selected. The publication trend gradually increased, with a majority of studies published since 2017 (69/88, 78%). Almost half of the studies were conducted in North America (38/88, 43%), followed by Europe (30/88, 34%). The most common setting in which the studies were conducted was the participant’s home (69/88, 78%). The treatment status varied, and the median sample size was 50 (33.8–84.0). The devices that were used to measure the PGHD were classified as research-grade wearable devices (57/113, 50.4%), consumer-grade wearable devices (28/113, 24.8%), or smartphones or tablet PCs for mobile applications (23/113, 20.4%). More than half of the studies measured physical activity (69/123, 56.1%), followed by patient-reported outcomes (23/123, 18.7%), vital signs (13/123, 10.6%), and sleep (12/123, 9.8%). The PGHD were mainly collected passively (63/88, 72%), and active collection methods were employed from 2015 onwards (20/88, 23%). In this review, the stages of PGHD utilization were classified as follows: (i) identification, monitoring, review, and analysis (88/88, 100%); (ii) feedback and reporting (32/88, 39%); (iii) motivation (30/88, 34%); and (iv) education and coaching (19/88, 22%).

Conclusions:

This scoping review provides a comprehensive summary of the overall characteristics and utilization stages of PGHD in older adults with various types and stages of cancer. Future research should emphasize the use of PGHD, which interacts with patients to provide patient-centered care through patient engagement. Therefore, our findings may provide valuable insights into PGHD that healthcare providers and researchers can utilize for geriatric cancer care.