Corrigendum to "Perceived social support in African American breast cancer patients: Predictors and effects" [Soc. Sci. Med. 192 (2017) 134-142].

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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

1. Randomized controlled trial of a breast cancer Survivor Stories intervention for African American women.Social science & medicine (1982) · 2021
   Trial
2. "We're in this together": Perceived effects of breast cancer on African American survivors' marital relationships.Journal of the Society for Social Work and Research · 2022
   Article

Corrections and comments

• Erratum for
  Perceived social support in African American breast cancer patients: Predictors and effects.2017

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Funding

Abstract

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.