Kyle Mendonça
Current Organizations / Institutes
The organizations/institutes from the scholar's latest article
Research Subjects
Kyle Mendonça has a total of 28 co-authors. Here are the top co-authors by number of shared publications:
- Craig Erker
Department of Pediatrics, Dalhousie University, Halifax, NS B3H 4R2, Canada
3 shared publications - Fiona Schulte
Department of Oncology, Division of Psychosocial Oncology, Cumming School of Medicine University of Calgary Calgary Alberta Canada
3 shared publications - Holly Wright
Department of Oncology, Division of Psychosocial Oncology, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, Canada
3 shared publications - Iqra Rahamatullah
Department of Community Health Sciences, University of Calgary, 2500 University Drive NW, Calgary, AB T2N 1N4, Canada
3 shared publications - Jenny Duong
Department of Oncology, Division of Psychosocial Oncology, Cumming School of Medicine University of Calgary Calgary Alberta Canada
3 shared publications - Karen Goddard
Department of Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, The University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC V6T 1Z4, Canada
3 shared publications
Latest Publications
- Open Access
- 30 July 2025
- Published by MDPI AG in Current Oncology
- Vol. 32 (8) , 427
Barriers and Enablers to Engaging with Long-Term Follow-Up Care Among Canadian Survivors of Pediatric Cancer: A COM-B Analysis
Survivors of pediatric cancer are at risk for late effects and require risk-adapted long-term follow-up (LTFU) care. Yet less than 50% of survivors attend LTFU care. This study aimed to identify barriers and enablers of engaging with LTFU care as perceived by Canadian survivors of pediatric cancer and healthcare providers (HCPs). Survivors (n = 108) and HCPs (n = 20) completed surveys assessing barriers and enablers to attending LTFU care, summarized using descriptive statistics. Participants were invited to participate in survivor focus groups (n = 22) or HCP semi-structured interviews (n = 7). These were analyzed using reflexive thematic analysis and the Capability, Opportunity, and Motivation for Behaviour Change (COM-B) model, which explores how an individual’s capability, opportunity, and motivation influence a target behaviour. Structural barriers, transitioning from pediatric to adult care, and time constraints were highlighted as barriers that affect survivors’ physical opportunity to engage in LTFU care. Accessibility, financial support, HCPs and family support, and community resources were highlighted as enablers that better survivors’ physical and social opportunity to engage in LTFU care. In conclusion, Canadian survivors of pediatric cancer highlighted barriers that limited their physical opportunity to attend LTFU care, while factors that enhanced their physical and social opportunities facilitated greater engagement with LTFU care.
- 30 July 2025
- Published by MDPI AG in Current Oncology
- Vol. 32 (8) , 427
Open AccessBarriers and Enablers to Engaging with Long-Term Follow-Up Care Among Canadian Survivors of Pediatric Cancer: A COM-B Analysis
Survivors of pediatric cancer are at risk for late effects and require risk-adapted long-term follow-up (LTFU) care. Yet less than 50% of survivors attend LTFU care. This study aimed to identify barriers and enablers of engaging with LTFU care as perceived by Canadian survivors of pediatric cancer and healthcare providers (HCPs). Survivors (n = 108) and HCPs (n = 20) completed surveys assessing barriers and enablers to attending LTFU care, summarized using descriptive statistics. Participants were invited to participate in survivor focus groups (n = 22) or HCP semi-structured interviews (n = 7). These were analyzed using reflexive thematic analysis and the Capability, Opportunity, and Motivation for Behaviour Change (COM-B) model, which explores how an individual’s capability, opportunity, and motivation influence a target behaviour. Structural barriers, transitioning from pediatric to adult care, and time constraints were highlighted as barriers that affect survivors’ physical opportunity to engage in LTFU care. Accessibility, financial support, HCPs and family support, and community resources were highlighted as enablers that better survivors’ physical and social opportunity to engage in LTFU care. In conclusion, Canadian survivors of pediatric cancer highlighted barriers that limited their physical opportunity to attend LTFU care, while factors that enhanced their physical and social opportunities facilitated greater engagement with LTFU care.
- Open Access
- 25 April 2025
- Published by JMIR Publications Inc. in JMIR Cancer
- Vol. 11 (1) , e57834
Co-Designing Priority Components of an mHealth Intervention to Enhance Follow-Up Care in Young Adult Survivors of Childhood Cancer and Health Care Providers: Qualitative Descriptive Study
Background: Survivors of childhood cancer are at risk of medical, psychological, and social late effects. To screen for their risks, receipt of consistent, cancer-specific follow-up care is crucial. However, <50% of survivors attend their aftercare, and only 35% of them recognize that they could have a serious health problem. The use of mobile health (mHealth) is a promising form of intervention to educate, connect, and empower survivors of childhood cancer on the importance of follow-up care. Objective: This study aimed to use co-design to identify the priority components to include in an mHealth intervention with young adult (aged between 18 and 39 years) survivors of childhood cancer and health care providers. Methods: This study was conducted between January and November 2022 in Canada and used patient-oriented research methods. Participants were recruited through local or provincial long-term follow-up clinics, using convenience sampling from patient partners who assisted in recruiting survivors across geographical areas in western, central, and eastern Canada, and social media outreach (X, formally known as Twitter; Facebook; and Instagram). Qualitative descriptive data (focus group interviews) from survivors of childhood cancer and health care providers (individual interviews) were gathered. We analyzed the collected data using reflexive thematic analysis and verified it through member checking techniques through an online community engagement event. Results: We conducted with patient partners 5 online (Zoom) focus groups with 22 survivors of childhood cancer (mean age 29.19, SD 4.78 y). We conducted individual telephone interviews with 7 health care providers. Participants identified five priority areas to be included in an mHealth intervention: (1) connections, (2) education and information, (3) engagement, (4) personalization, and (5) resources. Results were shared with and validated by survivors of childhood cancer, their families, health care providers, and academic researchers as part of a community engagement event. Small and large group discussions were facilitated to allow participants to review and discuss the accuracy of the themes derived regarding the core components to be included in mHealth. A graphic recording artist visually captured key ideas from the event. A subset of the participants also completed a web-based satisfaction survey, and responses indicated that the community engagement event was generally well received. Conclusions: Results from this study have provided the necessary foundation to progress in intervention development. The next step of this multiphased project is to build an innovative and accessible mHealth intervention prototype that is based on the identified core components and is grounded in an established conceptual framework for co-design of mHealth.
- 25 April 2025
- Published by JMIR Publications Inc. in JMIR Cancer
- Vol. 11 (1) , e57834
Open AccessCo-Designing Priority Components of an mHealth Intervention to Enhance Follow-Up Care in Young Adult Survivors of Childhood Cancer and Health Care Providers: Qualitative Descriptive Study
Background: Survivors of childhood cancer are at risk of medical, psychological, and social late effects. To screen for their risks, receipt of consistent, cancer-specific follow-up care is crucial. However, <50% of survivors attend their aftercare, and only 35% of them recognize that they could have a serious health problem. The use of mobile health (mHealth) is a promising form of intervention to educate, connect, and empower survivors of childhood cancer on the importance of follow-up care. Objective: This study aimed to use co-design to identify the priority components to include in an mHealth intervention with young adult (aged between 18 and 39 years) survivors of childhood cancer and health care providers. Methods: This study was conducted between January and November 2022 in Canada and used patient-oriented research methods. Participants were recruited through local or provincial long-term follow-up clinics, using convenience sampling from patient partners who assisted in recruiting survivors across geographical areas in western, central, and eastern Canada, and social media outreach (X, formally known as Twitter; Facebook; and Instagram). Qualitative descriptive data (focus group interviews) from survivors of childhood cancer and health care providers (individual interviews) were gathered. We analyzed the collected data using reflexive thematic analysis and verified it through member checking techniques through an online community engagement event. Results: We conducted with patient partners 5 online (Zoom) focus groups with 22 survivors of childhood cancer (mean age 29.19, SD 4.78 y). We conducted individual telephone interviews with 7 health care providers. Participants identified five priority areas to be included in an mHealth intervention: (1) connections, (2) education and information, (3) engagement, (4) personalization, and (5) resources. Results were shared with and validated by survivors of childhood cancer, their families, health care providers, and academic researchers as part of a community engagement event. Small and large group discussions were facilitated to allow participants to review and discuss the accuracy of the themes derived regarding the core components to be included in mHealth. A graphic recording artist visually captured key ideas from the event. A subset of the participants also completed a web-based satisfaction survey, and responses indicated that the community engagement event was generally well received. Conclusions: Results from this study have provided the necessary foundation to progress in intervention development. The next step of this multiphased project is to build an innovative and accessible mHealth intervention prototype that is based on the identified core components and is grounded in an established conceptual framework for co-design of mHealth.
- Open Access
- 27 February 2024
- Published by JMIR Publications Inc. in JMIR Preprints
Co-Designing Priority Components of an mHealth Intervention to Enhance Follow-Up Care in Young Adult Survivors of Childhood Cancer and Health Care Providers: Qualitative Descriptive Study (Preprint)
Journal of Medical Internet Research - International Scientific Journal for Medical Research, Information and Communication on the Internet #Preprint #PeerReviewMe: Warning: This is a unreviewed preprint. Readers are warned that the document has not been peer-reviewed by expert/patient reviewers or an academic editor, may contain misleading claims, and is likely to undergo changes before final publication, if accepted, or may have been rejected/withdrawn. Readers with interest and expertise are encouraged to sign up as peer-reviewer, if the paper is within an open peer-review period. Please cite this preprint only for review purposes or for grant applications and CVs (if you are the author). Background: Survivors of childhood cancer are at risk of medical, psychological, and social late effects. To screen for their risks, receipt of consistent, cancer-specific follow-up care is crucial. However, Objective: This study aimed to use co-design to identify the priority components to include in an mHealth intervention with young adult (aged between 18 and 39 years) survivors of childhood cancer and health care providers. Methods: This study was conducted between January and November 2022 in Canada and used patient-oriented research methods. Participants were recruited through local or provincial long-term follow-up clinics, using convenience sampling from patient partners who assisted in recruiting survivors across geographical areas in western, central, and eastern Canada, and social media outreach (X, formally known as Twitter; Facebook; and Instagram). Qualitative descriptive data (focus group interviews) from survivors of childhood cancer and health care providers (individual interviews) were gathered. We analyzed the collected data using reflexive thematic analysis and verified it through member checking techniques through an online community engagement event. Results: We conducted with patient partners 5 online (Zoom) focus groups with 22 survivors of childhood cancer (mean age 29.19, SD 4.78 y). We conducted individual telephone interviews with 7 health care providers. Participants identified five priority areas to be included in an mHealth intervention: (1) connections, (2) education and information, (3) engagement, (4) personalization, and (5) resources. Results were shared with and validated by survivors of childhood cancer, their families, health care providers, and academic researchers as part of a community engagement event. Small and large group discussions were facilitated to allow participants to review and discuss the accuracy of the themes derived regarding the core components to be included in mHealth. A graphic recording artist visually captured key ideas from the event. A subset of the participants also completed a web-based satisfaction survey, and responses indicated that the community engagement event was generally well received. Conclusions: Results from this study have provided the necessary foundation to progress in intervention development. The next step of this multiphased project is to build an innovative and accessible mHealth intervention prototype that is based on the identified core components and is grounded in an established conceptual framework for co-design of mHealth.
- 27 February 2024
- Published by JMIR Publications Inc. in JMIR Preprints
Open AccessCo-Designing Priority Components of an mHealth Intervention to Enhance Follow-Up Care in Young Adult Survivors of Childhood Cancer and Health Care Providers: Qualitative Descriptive Study (Preprint)
Journal of Medical Internet Research - International Scientific Journal for Medical Research, Information and Communication on the Internet #Preprint #PeerReviewMe: Warning: This is a unreviewed preprint. Readers are warned that the document has not been peer-reviewed by expert/patient reviewers or an academic editor, may contain misleading claims, and is likely to undergo changes before final publication, if accepted, or may have been rejected/withdrawn. Readers with interest and expertise are encouraged to sign up as peer-reviewer, if the paper is within an open peer-review period. Please cite this preprint only for review purposes or for grant applications and CVs (if you are the author). Background: Survivors of childhood cancer are at risk of medical, psychological, and social late effects. To screen for their risks, receipt of consistent, cancer-specific follow-up care is crucial. However, Objective: This study aimed to use co-design to identify the priority components to include in an mHealth intervention with young adult (aged between 18 and 39 years) survivors of childhood cancer and health care providers. Methods: This study was conducted between January and November 2022 in Canada and used patient-oriented research methods. Participants were recruited through local or provincial long-term follow-up clinics, using convenience sampling from patient partners who assisted in recruiting survivors across geographical areas in western, central, and eastern Canada, and social media outreach (X, formally known as Twitter; Facebook; and Instagram). Qualitative descriptive data (focus group interviews) from survivors of childhood cancer and health care providers (individual interviews) were gathered. We analyzed the collected data using reflexive thematic analysis and verified it through member checking techniques through an online community engagement event. Results: We conducted with patient partners 5 online (Zoom) focus groups with 22 survivors of childhood cancer (mean age 29.19, SD 4.78 y). We conducted individual telephone interviews with 7 health care providers. Participants identified five priority areas to be included in an mHealth intervention: (1) connections, (2) education and information, (3) engagement, (4) personalization, and (5) resources. Results were shared with and validated by survivors of childhood cancer, their families, health care providers, and academic researchers as part of a community engagement event. Small and large group discussions were facilitated to allow participants to review and discuss the accuracy of the themes derived regarding the core components to be included in mHealth. A graphic recording artist visually captured key ideas from the event. A subset of the participants also completed a web-based satisfaction survey, and responses indicated that the community engagement event was generally well received. Conclusions: Results from this study have provided the necessary foundation to progress in intervention development. The next step of this multiphased project is to build an innovative and accessible mHealth intervention prototype that is based on the identified core components and is grounded in an established conceptual framework for co-design of mHealth.