Search

BACKGROUND The number of mobile health apps is rapidly increasing. This means that consumers are faced with a bewildering array of choices, and finding the benefit of such apps may be challenging. The significant international burden of breast cancer (BC) and the potential of mobile health apps to improve medical and public health practices mean that such apps will likely be important because of their functionalities in daily life. As the app market has grown exponentially, several review studies have scrutinized cancer- or BC-related apps. However, those reviews concentrated on the availability of the apps and relied on user ratings to decide on app quality. To minimize subjectivity in quality assessment, quantitative methods to assess BC-related apps are required. OBJECTIVE The purpose of this study is to analyze the content and quality of BC-related apps to provide useful information for end users and clinicians. METHODS Based on a stepwise systematic approach, we analyzed apps related to BC, including those related to prevention, detection, treatment, and survivor support. We used the keywords “breast cancer” in English and Korean to identify commercially available apps in the Google Play and App Store. The apps were then independently evaluated by 2 investigators to determine their eligibility for inclusion. The content and quality of the apps were analyzed using objective frameworks and the Mobile App Rating Scale (MARS), respectively. RESULTS The initial search identified 1148 apps, 69 (6%) of which were included. Most BC-related apps provided information, and some recorded patient-generated health data, provided psychological support, and assisted with medication management. The Kendall coefficient of concordance between the raters was 0.91 (P2 years ago, or by individuals, had significantly lower MARS scores compared to other apps (P CONCLUSIONS The quality of BC-related apps was generally acceptable according to the MARS, but the gaps between the highest- and lowest-rated apps were large. In addition, apps using personalized data were of higher quality than those merely giving related information, especially after treatment in the cancer care continuum. We also found that apps that had been updated within 1 year and developed by private companies had higher MARS scores. This may imply that there are criteria for end users and clinicians to help choose the right apps for better clinical outcomes.

Objective: We aimed to determine the differences in stage at diagnosis of cervical cancer among Korean women according to screening history. Methods: Using linkage data from the Korean Central Cancer Registry and Korean National Cancer Screening Program (KNCSP), we included 18,388 women older than 30 years who were newly diagnosed with cervical cancer between 2013 and 2014 and examined their screening history. Between individuals, age group and socioeconomic status were matched to control for potential confounders. Results: Significantly more cases of carcinoma in situ (CIS) were diagnosed in the ever-screened (71.77%) group than in the never-screened group (54.78%), while localized, regional, distant, and unknown stage were more frequent in the never-screened group. Women in the ever-screened group were most likely to be diagnosed with CIS than with invasive cervical cancer (adjusted odds ratio [aOR]=2.40; 95% confidence interval [CI]=2.18-2.65). The aOR for being diagnosed with CIS was highest among women who were screened 3 times or more (aOR=5.10; 95% CI=4.03-6.45). The ORs were highest for women screened within 24 months of diagnosis and tended to decrease with an increasing time since last screening (p-trend

Objective: This study sought to examine changes in trends for quality indicators of the population-based Korean National Cancer Screening Program (KNCSP) for cervical cancer from years 2005 to 2013. Methods: Our study data were derived from the KNCSP database. Cervical cancer diagnosis information was ascertained through linkage with the Korean National Cancer Registry and the KNCSP database. Performance measures for cervical cancer screening were estimated, including participation rate, positive rate, crude detection rate (CDR), interval cancer rate (ICR), positive predictive value (PPV), sensitivity, and specificity. Joinpoint analysis was applied to calculate annual percentage changes (APCs) in all indicators according to socio-demographic factors. Results: A significant increasing trend was noted in participation rates (APC=13.4%; 95% confidence interval [CI]=10.5, 16.4). PPV and specificity increased from years 2005 to 2009 and remained stable till 2013. An increasing trend was discovered in CDRs for cervical cancer in situ (APC=3.9%; 95% CI=1.0, 6.9), whereas a decreasing trend was observed in ICRs for invasive cervical cancer (APC=-2.5%; 95% CI=-4.5, -0.5). Medical Aid recipients and women older than 70 years showed the lowest participation rates, but higher CDRs and ICRs, compared to other groups. In general, most of the quality indicators for cervical cancer screening improved from 2005 to 2009 and remained stable to 2013. Conclusion: The KNCSP for cervical cancer in Korea has improved in terms of participation rate and accuracy of the screening test. These results may be attributed to the National Quality Improvement Program for KNCSP.