Use of a web-based app to improve postoperative outcomes for patients receiving gynecological oncology care: A randomized controlled feasibility trial

The effectiveness of online interventions for patients with gynecological cancer: An integrative review

“…Of the 16 studies, seven were conducted in the United States [26,32,36,37,[40][41][42], seven were conducted in mainland China [27][28][29][30][31]33,34], one was conducted in Canada [25,38], and one was conducted in Australia [35,39]. All studies were published between 2003 and 2019, and 75% (12/16) of the studies were published between 2016 and 2019 [27][28][29][30][31][32][33][34][35][39][40][41][42]. The majority of the patients recruited were highly educated (college or higher) in six studies [25,26,32,33,38,41,42].…”

“…All six qualitative articles [35][36][37][38]40,42] and two mixed-methods articles [39,41] were published in English. Two quantitative nonrandomized articles were published in Chinese [27,30].…”

“…In this review, the sample sizes of ten quantitative articles [25][26][27][28][29][30][31][32][33][34] and the quantitative parts of the two mixed-methods articles [39,41] ranged from 19 to 154, among which the sample sizes of nine articles were less than 82 [25][26][27][28][29][32][33][34]41]. The sample sizes of six qualitative articles [35][36][37][38]40,42] and the qualitative parts of the two mixedmethods articles [39,41] ranged from five to 134. None of the included studies mentioned sample size calculation.…”

“…1). The 18 articles were originally classified into ten quantitative [25][26][27][28][29][30][31][32][33][34], four qualitative [35][36][37][38], and four mixed-methods [39][40][41][42] study designs. Classen et al [25] and Wiljer et al [38] reported different findings from the GyneGals program, and Erfani et al [35] and Erfani et al [39] explored the different perspectives of the Ovarian Cancer Australia (OCA) Facebook.…”

“…Two researchers (HL and JZ) independently appraised the quality of the included articles and the other three researchers (MY, SC and HH) validated the quality appraisal outcomes. Two of the four articles with the mixed-methods study design were eventually appraised with the qualitative study criterion because only the qualitative parts of these articles were useful for this review [40,42]. Thus, six articles were appraised by the qualitative study criterion from the MMAT [35][36][37][38]40,42].…”