SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2017
Online support groups for women with breast cancer.
Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 43 papers, 8 of them syntheses 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
43 citing papers in PubMed, 8 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 93 citations in OpenAlex.
- The Effect of Theory-Guided Positive Psychological Interventions for Patients With Breast Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of clinical nursing · 2026Pooled it
- [S3 guideline on sepsis-prevention, diagnosis, therapy, and follow-up care-update 2025].Medizinische Klinik, Intensivmedizin und Notfallmedizin · 2025Guideline
- Effects of Web-Based Interventions on Anxiety and Depression in Patients With Breast Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.Psycho-oncology · 2025Pooled it
- Digital Health Interventions to Improve Mental Health in Patients With Cancer: Umbrella Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Pooled it
- How effective is peer-to-peer support in cancer patients and survivors? A systematic review.Journal of cancer research and clinical oncology · 2023Pooled it
- Peer support for people with chronic conditions: a systematic review of reviews.BMC health services research · 2022Pooled it
- Distress Management, Version 3.2019, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology.Journal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network : JNCCN · 2019Guideline
- Antidepressants for the treatment of depression in people with cancer.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2018Pooled it
- Digital literacy linked to engagement and psychological benefits among breast cancer survivors in Internet-based peer support groups.European journal of cancer care · 2019Trial
- A National Virtual Peer Support Group for Women Veterans Living with Breast Cancer: Lessons from the Field.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2026Article
- "Don't be a hero, don't keep it a secret": understanding the lived experience of Chinese American patients with cancer through their expressive writing entries.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2026Article
- How Cancer Online Support Groups Work, for Whom, and in What Circumstances: Realist Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Review
- Coproducing an Online Platform for People With Long-Term Physical Health Conditions: Development and Usability Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Online peer support program for women with metastatic cancer: a pre-post evaluation.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2025Article
- The impact of cancer expectations on psychological responses following a cancer signal detected result in asymptomatic multi-cancer detection (MCED) testing.British journal of cancer · 2025Article
- Companionship and Sharing Create Social Connections of an Online Community-Based Intervention for Patients with Cancer Receiving Outpatient Care: Pilot Study.JMIR cancer · 2025Article
- Online Peer Support for Long-Term Conditions: Protocol for a Feasibility Randomized Controlled Trial.JMIR research protocols · 2025Article
- Article
- Article
- Evaluating the User-Perceived Benefit of a Virtual Lung Cancer Patient Education and Support Community: LVNG With Lung Cancer.Journal of the advanced practitioner in oncology · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSurvival rates for women with a diagnosis of breast cancer continue to improve. However, some women may experience physical, psychological and emotional effects post diagnosis, throughout treatment and beyond. Support groups can provide opportunities for people to share their experiences and learn from others. As the number of online support groups increases, more and more women with breast cancer will likely access them.
objectivesTo assess effects of online support groups on the emotional distress, uncertainty, anxiety, depression and quality of life (QoL) of women with breast cancer. SEARCH
methodsWe searched for trials in the Cochrane Breast Cancer Specialised Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2016, Issue 4), MEDLINE, Embase and PsycINFO on 2 May 2016, and we handsearched journals and reference lists. We also searched the World Health Organization's International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (WHO ICTRP) search portal and clinicaltrials.gov on 2 May 2016. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) assessing effects of online support groups on women with a diagnosis of breast cancer and women who have completed breast cancer treatment. We included studies comparing online support groups with a usual care group, and studies comparing two or more types of online support groups (without a usual care group). DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently extracted data and assessed risk of bias. We presented outcome data using mean differences (MDs) and standardised mean differences (SMDs) along with 95% confidence intervals (CIs), and we used the fixed-effect model when appropriate. We assessed the quality of the body of evidence using the GRADE approach. MAIN
resultsWe included six studies (492 women) that assessed online support groups for women with breast cancer. Online support groups in these six trials lasted from six to 30 weeks. Women participated in these groups between 1.5 and 2.5 hours per week, and investigators conducted all studies in the USA. Participants were predominantly white and well educated and were moderate to high earners. Four studies compared an online support group versus a control group, and the other two compared a 'moderated' versus a 'peer-led' online support group, and a 'standard' versus an 'enhanced' online support group, respectively.None of the included studies measured 'emotional distress' or uncertainty. One study (78 women) for which data for analysis were missing reported no positive effects of online support on 'distress' and 'cancer-specific distress' versus support provided by a control group. Two studies measured anxiety: One study (72 women) found no difference in anxiety at the end of the intervention between the online support group and the control group (MD -0.40, 95% CI -6.42 to 5.62; low-quality evidence), and the second study (184 women) reported a reduction in anxiety levels at the end of the intervention when comparing the 'standard' support group (run by participants without prompting from health professionals) versus an 'enhanced' online support group (in which participants were specifically asked by the researcher to respond to one another's need for support).Five studies (414 women) measured depression. Three studies compared depression in the online support group with depression in the control group. Pooled data from two studies (120 women) showed a small to moderate reduction in depression in the online support group compared with control groups at the end of the intervention (SMD -0.37, 95% CI -0.75 to 0.00; very low-quality evidence). The third study, a pilot study (30 women), provided no data for analysis but reported no difference in depression between participants in support and control groups at the end of the intervention. Of the remaining two studies that measured depression, one study (60 women) provided no extractable data for comparison but reported no difference in depressive symptoms between a 'moderated' and a 'peer-led' support group; the other study (184 women) reported greater reduction in depression in the 'standard' support group than in the 'enhanced' online support group.Three studies measured quality of life. One pilot study (30 women) provided limited data for analysis but reported no change in quality of life at the end of the intervention. Only two studies (140 women) provided data for pooling and showed no positive effects on quality of life at four months post intervention compared with controls (SMD -0.11, 95% CI -0.47 to 0.24; very low-quality evidence). At 12 months post intervention, one study (78 women) reported that the intervention group did not attain better quality of life scores than the control group (MD -10.89, 95% CI -20.41 to -1.37; low-quality evidence).We found no data for subgroup analyses on stage of disease, treatment modality and types and doses of interventions. No studies measured adverse effects. AUTHORS'
conclusionsThis review did not find the evidence required to show whether participation in online support groups was beneficial for women with breast cancer, because identified trials were small and of low or very low quality. Large, rigorous trials with ethnically and economically diverse participants are needed to provide robust evidence regarding the psychosocial outcomes selected for this review.
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.