ArticleSupportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer2016
Toward structured peer support interventions in oncology: a qualitative insight into the experiences of gynaecological cancer survivors providing peer support.
Article in Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 34 citations in OpenAlex.
- Peer Support in Chronic Conditions from the Peer Supporters' Perspective: A Systematic Review.Psychosocial intervention · 2025Pooled it
- Motivation to Consent and Adhere to the FORT Randomized Controlled Trial.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2022Trial
- Peer Mentors for People with Advanced Cancer: Lessons Learnt from Recruiting and Training Peer Mentors for a Feasibility Randomized Controlled Trial.Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education · 2021Trial
- Tensions and Opportunities in Nurse, Midwife, and Peer Worker Collaborations in Healthcare Delivery: A Scoping Review and Narrative Synthesis.Journal of advanced nursing · 2026Article
- "We are champions": an investigation on how cancer support group propels patient advocacy, voices, education, mentorship, and support.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2025Article
- A Structured Peer Support Intervention for Patients With Hematologic Malignancies Undergoing Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation: Peer Support Interventionists' Perspectives.Transplantation and cellular therapy · 2025Article
- A Qualitative Exploration of Peer Supporters' Experiences of Undertaking a Co-Produced Mental Health and Emotional Well-Being Training Programme.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2024Article
- Integrating accompanying patients into clinical oncology teams: limiting and facilitating factors.BMC health services research · 2024Article
- Accompanying patients in clinical oncology teams: Reported activities and perceived effects.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2023Article
- "There's somebody like me": perspectives of a peer-to-peer gynecologic cancer mentorship program.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2021Article
- The patient advisor, an organizational resource as a lever for an enhanced oncology patient experience (PAROLE-onco): a longitudinal multiple case study protocol.BMC health services research · 2021Article
- Sexuality post gynaecological cancer treatment: a qualitative study with South African women.BMJ open · 2020Article
- Peer support opportunities across the cancer care continuum: a systematic scoping review of recent peer-reviewed literature.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeResearch into dyadic (one-to-one) peer support has predominantly focused on the recipients of peer support whilst neglecting the impact on the peer support providers (PSPs). Increasingly, structured/protocolised peer support interventions are employed. The aim of this qualitative study was to explore the experience of providing peer support within a protocolised intervention and how common key characteristics of such interventions (guidelines and checklists, rigorous training and partnerships with health professionals) may influence PSPs' experiences. This research was conducted within the context of an ongoing randomised controlled trial investigating a protocolised peer support intervention (the Peer and Nurse support Trial to Assist women in Gynaecological Oncology (PeNTAGOn) study).
methodsEleven women (gynaecological cancer survivors) providing peer support within the PeNTAGOn study participated in semi-structured telephone interviews. Transcribed interviews were analysed using interpretative phenomenological analysis.
resultsFive key themes were identified which described the overall experience of providing protocolised peer support: (i) fitting oneself to the protocolised PSP role, (ii) the impact of personal beliefs about the value of research, (iii) protocolisation as both blessing and curse, (iv) discussing taboo or sensitive topics and (v) the impact of interactions with study personnel.
conclusionsThese insights into the advantages and disadvantages of protocolised peer support can be used to inform future research and social support programs and maximise the effectiveness of such programs for patients, PSPs and the health-care system.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.