Conectar
In clinical oncology nursing practice, the preservation of quality of life is an essential component. E-health interventions have been proven effective in improving quality of life in patients with cancer, but the optimal content and delivery format remain undetermined.
To compare the efficacy of e-health interventions with varying contents and delivery formats in improving quality of life in patients with cancer.
Network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
Six databases, including Medline, Web of Science, Embase, CINAHL, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and PsycINFO, were searched from inception to October 25, 2025.
Two reviewers independently screened studies and extracted data. A pairwise meta-analysis and a network meta-analysis were performed sequentially to determine the efficacy of different contents and delivery formats of e-health interventions in improving quality of life in patients with cancer.
A total of 50 studies included e-health interventions with eight contents and five delivery formats. The results identified health education (SUCRA = 82.2%), symptom management (SUCRA = 72.2%), and rehabilitation interventions (SUCRA = 71.1%) as the three most effective e-health intervention contents for improving quality of life in patients with cancer. Among delivery formats, app-based (SUCRA = 82.1%), internet/web-based (SUCRA = 71.5%), and telephone-based e-health interventions (SUCRA = 53.3%) ranked among the top three.
This study explored the efficacy of different contents and delivery formats of e-health interventions in improving quality of life in patients with cancer. These results are expected to provide an evidence-based basis for clinical oncology nursing practice.
PROSPERO number: CRD42025638829
Although cancer is a worldwide public health problem, it can be detected early and prevented through cancer screening. However, not all individuals are motivated to undergo cancer screening. Current studies have revealed that decision aids can impact decision-related outcomes among individuals at risk of cancer. However, their efficacy on decision knowledge and decision conflict remains unclear.
The purpose of this meta-analysis was to appraise the efficacy of decision aids on decision knowledge and conflict among people at risk of cancer.
Nine electronic databases were utilized to search the literature until October 31, 2024. The Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool 2.0 and the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach were used to evaluate the certainty of evidence. The data were analyzed using Stata 16.0.
Thirteen relevant studies with 2971 participants published between 2002 and 2023. The pooled results showed that decision aids significantly improved decision knowledge (SMD = 0.45, 95% CI [0.19–0.72], p = 0.00) and decreased decision conflict (SMD = −0.47, 95% CI [−0.73 to −0.21], p = 0.00). Subgroup analyses revealed that the framework, format, population, and duration of decision aids can influence their effects on decision knowledge and decision conflict among people at risk of cancer.
This meta-analysis illuminates that decision aids are effective for improving decision knowledge and diminishing decision conflict among people at risk of cancer. The framework, format, population, and duration should be considered when developing decision aids. Our findings may suggest future directions for assisting people at risk of cancer in making informed decisions about cancer screening. Additional trustworthy research is required to verify these findings.
FreshRSS 