Healthc Inform Res.  2025 Jan;31(1):37-47. 10.4258/hir.2025.31.1.37.

FIT4PEDON: Mobile Nutrition Counseling Application Effectiveness and Usability for Childhood Cancer Survivors

• Bavatharani R
• Supriya V
• Scott JX
• Sankaranarayanan S

• KMID: 2564350
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.4258/hir.2025.31.1.37

Abstract

Objectives
Conventional face-to-face nutrition counseling has played a crucial role in promoting healthy habits. However, the emergence of digital health technologies has introduced mobile app-based nutrition counseling as an effective alternative. This research aims to develop and evaluate the usability and effectiveness of the FIT4PEDON mobile nutrition counseling application in promoting healthy dietary behaviors and lifestyle modifications among childhood cancer survivors (CCS).
Methods
This study employed a mixed-methods approach, incorporating both survey and qualitative and quantitative analyses. A total of 33 health care professional experts participated. The reliability of the questionnaire was assessed using the Kuder-Richardson method, and its content validity was confirmed through expert evaluation. Usability testing was conducted with a validated questionnaire.
Results
The development process resulted in two applications: an Android mobile application and an admin web application. The findings indicated that a significant proportion of experts endorsed the app for dietary management. Statistical analysis showed significant differences between “yes” and “no” responses. However, no significant differences were found when comparing responses across different sex or age groups.
Conclusions
The FIT4PEDON application shows promise in supporting CCS to adopt healthier lifestyles. Nevertheless, the study underscores the necessity for further research, particularly focusing on specific age groups of experts with relevant experience, to achieve more conclusive results. Leveraging technology through mobile apps has the potential to improve the quality of survivorship care and foster sustained engagement in long-term care for pediatric cancer survivors.

Keyword

Digital Health, Cancer Survivors, Delivery of Health Care, Mobile Applications, Long-Term Care

Figure

• 

  Figure 1 FIT4PEDON mobile application development and usability evaluation process.

• 

  Figure 2 Google Forms questionnaire.

• 

  Figure 3 FIT4PEDON mobile application logo and Google Play Store page.

• 

  Figure 4 Interface of the mobile application for childhood cancer survivors.

• 

  Figure 5 Web-based administration for enhanced user management and support.

Reference

References

1. Erdmann F, Frederiksen LE, Bonaventure A, Mader L, Hasle H, Robison LL, et al. Childhood cancer: survival, treatment modalities, late effects and improvements over time. Cancer Epidemiol. 2021; 71(Pt B):101733. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.canep.2020.101733.

2. Wroot H, Afzal AR, Forbes C, Russell KB, Trepanier L, Patton M, et al. Fear of cancer recurrence among survivors of childhood cancer. Psychooncology. 2020; 29(7):1132–40. https://doi.org/10.1002/pon.5387.

3. Ward ZJ, Yeh JM, Bhakta N, Frazier AL, Girardi F, Atun R. Global childhood cancer survival estimates and priority-setting: a simulation-based analysis. Lancet Oncol. 2019; 20(7):972–83. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1470-2045(19)30273-6.

4. Wiseman MJ. Nutrition and cancer: prevention and survival. Br J Nutr. 2019; 122(5):481–7. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0007114518002222.

5. Cohen J, Collins L, Gregerson L, Chandra J, Cohn RJ. Nutritional concerns of survivors of childhood cancer: a “First World” perspective. Pediatr Blood Cancer. 2020; 67(Suppl 3):e28193. https://doi.org/10.1002/pbc.28193.

6. Fakih El Khoury C, Karavetian M, Halfens RJG, Crutzen R, Khoja L, Schols JMGA. The effects of dietary mobile apps on nutritional outcomes in adults with chronic diseases: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Acad Nutr Diet. 2019; 119(4):626–51. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jand.2018.11.010.

7. Ana FA, Loreto MS, Jose LM, Pablo SM, Maria Pilar MJ, Myriam SA. Mobile applications in oncology: a systematic review of health science databases. Int J Med Inform. 2020; 133:104001. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2019.104001.

8. Psihogios AM, Schwartz LA, Deatrick JA, Ver Hoeve ES, Anderson LM, Wartman EC, et al. Preferences for cancer survivorship care among adolescents and young adults who experienced healthcare transitions and their parents. J Cancer Surviv. 2019; 13(4):620–31. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11764-019-00781-x.

9. Samoggia A, Riedel B. Assessment of nutrition-focused mobile apps’ influence on consumers’ healthy food behaviour and nutrition knowledge. Food Res Int. 2020; 128:108766. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodres.2019.108766.

10. Akmal Muhamat N, Hasan R, Saddki N, Mohd Arshad MR, Ahmad M. Development and usability testing of mobile application on diet and oral health. PLoS One. 2021; 16(9):e0257035. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0257035.

11. Toronto CE, Remington R. A step-by-step guide to conducting an integrative review. Cham, Switzerland: Springer;2020. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-37504-1.

12. Souza MT, Silva MD, Carvalho Rd. Integrative review: What is it? How to do it? Einstein (Sao Paulo). 2010; 8(1):102–6. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1679-45082010RW1134.

13. Parameswaran UD, Ozawa-Kirk JL, Latendresse G. To live (code) or to not: a new method for coding in qualitative research. Qual Soc Work. 2020; 19(4):630–44. https://doi.org/10.1177/1473325019840394.

14. Elliott V. Thinking about the coding process in qualitative data analysis. Qual Rep. 2018; 23(11):2850–61. https://doi.org/10.46743/2160-3715/2018.3560.

15. Mayer I. Qualitative research with a focus on qualitative data analysis. Int J Sales Retail Mark. 2015; 4(9):53–67.

16. Saldana S. An introduction to codes and coding. The coding manual for qualitative researchers. Thousand Oaks (CA): Sage Publications;2009.

17. Williams M, Moser T. The art of coding and thematic exploration in qualitative research. Int Manag Rev. 2019; 15(1):45–55.

18. Mortenson WB, Singh G, MacGillivray M, Sadeghi M, Mills P, Adams J, et al. Development of a self-management app for people with spinal cord injury. J Med Syst. 2019; 43(6):145. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10916-019-1273-x.

19. Janesick VJ. Peer debriefing. The Blackwell encyclopedia of sociology. Hoboken (NJ): John Wiley & Sons;2007. p. 1–2. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781405165518.wbeosp014.

20. Kim HY. Statistical notes for clinical researchers: chi-squared test and Fisher’s exact test. Restor Dent Endod. 2017; 42(2):152–5. https://doi.org/10.5395/rde.2017.42.2.152.

21. Seval M, Kurt A. Parents’ postoperative pain measure: Turkish validity and reliability. J Clin Pract Res. 2021; 43(2):156–60. https://dx.doi.org/10.14744/etd.2020.59260.

22. Ozener B, Karabulut E, Kocahan T, Bilgic P. Validity and reliability of the Sports Nutrition Knowledge Questionnaire for the Turkish athletes. Marmara Med J. 2021; 34(1):45–50. https://doi.org/10.5472/marumj.866534.

23. Brown B, Harris K, Dybdal L, Malich J, Bodnar B, Hall E. Feasibility of text messaging to promote child health in a rural community on an American Indian reservation. Health Educ J. 2019; 78(5):557–69. https://doi.org/10.1177/0017896918824624.

24. Zarnowiecki D, Mauch CE, Middleton G, Matwiejczyk L, Watson WL, Dibbs J, et al. A systematic evaluation of digital nutrition promotion websites and apps for supporting parents to influence children’s nutrition. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2020; 17(1):17. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12966-020-0915-1.

25. Chellaiyan VG, Nirupama AY, Taneja N. Telemedicine in India: Where do we stand? J Family Med Prim Care. 2019; 8(6):1872–6. https://doi.org/10.4103/jfmpc.jfmpc_264_19.