Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26902366›Full record

Trial reportJournal of cancer survivorship : research and practice2016

A person-centered intervention targeting the psychosocial needs of gynecological cancer survivors: a randomized clinical trial.

Mette Linnet Olesen, Anne-Katrine Duun-Henriksen, Helena Hansson, Bent Ottesen, Klaus Kaae Andersen, Vibeke Zoffmann

Abstract readComparative StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Journal of cancer survivorship : research and practice, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
12.5field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

21 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 51 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Article
  8. Patient Voices: What Can We Learn From the Covid-19 Pandemic About Follow-Up Care in Gynaecologic Oncology?Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2025
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Labeled as lucky: contradictions between what women and healthcare professionals experience regarding the need for help after the early stages of gynecological cancer.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2020
    Article
  19. Review
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Mette Linnet OlesenWomen's and Children's Health Research Unit, Juliane Marie Centre, Copenhagen University Hospital, Rigshospitalet, Blegdamsvej 9, 2100, Copenhagen Ø, Denmark. mette.linnet.olesen@regionh.dk.
Anne-Katrine Duun-HenriksenThe Danish Cancer Society Research Centre, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Helena HanssonWomen's and Children's Health Research Unit, Juliane Marie Centre, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Bent OttesenJuliane Marie Centre, Copenhagen University Hospital, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Klaus Kaae AndersenStatistics, Bioinformatics and Registry, The Danish Cancer Society Research Centre, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Vibeke ZoffmannWomen's and Children's Health Research Unit, Juliane Marie Centre, Copenhagen University Hospital, Rigshospitalet, Blegdamsvej 9, 2100, Copenhagen Ø, Denmark.
Rigshospitalet · DKDanish Cancer Society · DK

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeWe investigated the effect of a person-centered intervention consisting of two to four nurse-led conversations using guided self-determination tailored to gynecologic cancer (GSD-GYN-C) on gynecological cancer survivors' quality of life (QOL), impact of cancer, distress, anxiety, depression, self-esteem, and self-reported ability to monitor and respond to symptoms of recurrence.

methodsWe randomly assigned 165 gynecological cancer survivors to usual care (UC) plus GSD-GYN-C or UC alone. Self-reported QOL-cancer survivor (QOL-CS) total score and subscale scores on physical, psychological, social, and spiritual well-being were assessed before randomization and at 3 and 9 months after randomization using t tests. Bonferroni and Pipper corrections were applied for multiple testing adjustments.

resultsAt 9 months, the GSD-GYN-C plus UC group scored significantly higher on the QOL-CS total scale (P = 0.02) and on the QOL-CS physical well-being subscale (P = 0.01), compared to women receiving UC alone. After adjusting for baseline scores, only the difference in the physical well-being subscale was statistically significant. No other measured outcomes differed between the intervention and control groups after baseline adjustment.

conclusionWe observed higher physical well-being 9 months after randomization in the GSD-GYN-C group, as compared to women receiving usual care. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: The results suggest that the person-centered intervention GSD-GYN-C may improve physical well-being in gynecological cancer survivors. However, further testing is needed.

Indexed as

Early Intervention, EducationalQuality of LifeAdultAnxietyCase-Control StudiesDepressionFemaleGenital Neoplasms, FemaleHealth Services Needs and DemandHumansMental DisordersMiddle AgedNeoplasm Recurrence, LocalPatient-Centered CareSelf ConceptSurvivorsCancer survivorshipEmpowermentGuided Self-DeterminationGynecological cancerQuality of lifeRandomized clinical trial

Identifiers

PMID26902366
OpenAlexW2287415875

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.