Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27657981›Full record

ArticleHealth psychology : official journal of the Division of Health Psychology, American Psychological Association2016

Adapting a couple-based intimacy enhancement intervention to breast cancer: A developmental study.

Jennifer Barsky Reese, Laura S Porter, Kristen E Casale, Elissa T Bantug, Sharon L Bober, Sharon C Schwartz, Katherine Clegg Smith

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Health psychology : official journal of the Division of Health Psychology, American Psychological Association, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

25 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Clinical Practice Strategies to Address Sexual Health in Female Cancer Survivors.Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology · 2023
    Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Observational
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

7 authors.

Jennifer Barsky ReeseCancer Prevention and Control Program, Fox Chase Cancer Center.
Laura S PorterDepartment of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Duke University Medical Center.
Kristen E CasaleCancer Prevention and Control Program, Fox Chase Cancer Center.
Elissa T BantugJohns Hopkins Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center.
Sharon L BoberDepartment of Psychosocial Oncology and Palliative Care, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Harvard Medical School.
Sharon C SchwartzSection of Gynecologic Oncology, Fox Chase Cancer Center.
Katherine Clegg SmithDepartment of Health, Behavior, and Society, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health.

Funding

WORD PROCESSING CENTER--COREP30CA006927 · NCI · RESEARCH INST OF FOX CHASE CAN CTR · PI Margaret von Mehren · 1985 to 2026
$138.8M
Phone-Based Intimacy Enhancement Intervention for Couples facing Breast CancerR21CA191354 · NCI · RESEARCH INST OF FOX CHASE CAN CTR · PI REESE, JENNIFER BARSKY · 2015 to 2016
$345k
NCI NIH HHS P30 CA006927NCI NIH HHS R21 CA191354
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveSexual concerns continue to be poorly addressed for women treated for breast cancer and evidence-based interventions that adequately address these concerns are scarce. The objective of this study was to adapt a telephone-based intimacy enhancement intervention, previously tested in couples facing colorectal cancer, to the needs of women with breast cancer through qualitative focus groups, cognitive interviews, and expert review.

methodThree semistructured qualitative focus groups in partnered posttreatment breast cancer survivors (n = 15) reporting sexual concerns were conducted to investigate experiences of breast cancer-related sexual concerns and intervention preferences. Focus group data were coded using the framework approach to qualitative analysis; 8 key themes were identified and used to develop the content and format of the intervention. Feedback from cognitive interviews with study-naïve breast cancer survivors (n = 4) and expert review of materials were also incorporated in finalizing the intervention materials.

resultsQualitative findings centered on the impact of breast cancer and its treatment on women's sexuality and on the intimate relationship, experiences of helpful and unhelpful coping methods, and explicit intervention preferences. Focus group data were particularly helpful in identifying the scope of educational topics and in determining how to structure intervention skills practice (e.g., intimacy-related communication) to be optimally relevant and helpful for both women and their partners. Cognitive interview feedback helped refine intervention materials.

conclusionAn intimacy enhancement intervention was adapted for women with breast cancer and their partners. This intervention offers a promising, potentially disseminable approach to addressing breast cancer-related sexual concerns. (PsycINFO Database Record

Indexed as

Interpersonal RelationsAdultBreast NeoplasmsColorectal NeoplasmsCouples TherapyFemaleFocus GroupsHumansMiddle AgedSexual BehaviorSexual PartnersSurvivors

Identifiers

PMID27657981
PMCPMC5034713

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.