Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34707659›Full record

ReviewJournal of oncology2021

Interventions to Improve Self-Efficacy in Colorectal Cancer Patients and/or Caregivers: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Jiali Gong, Caiping Hu, Meizhen Chen, Qian Cao, Qiuping Li

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of oncology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 4 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

16 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. 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

5 authors.

Jiali GongWuxi School of Medicine, Jiangnan University, Wuxi, Jiangsu Province, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3559-2419
Caiping HuShanxi Provincial Cancer Hospital, Taiyuan, Shanxi Province, China.
Meizhen ChenWuxi School of Medicine, Jiangnan University, Wuxi, Jiangsu Province, China.
Qian CaoWuxi School of Medicine, Jiangnan University, Wuxi, Jiangsu Province, China.
Qiuping LiWuxi School of Medicine, Jiangnan University, Wuxi, Jiangsu Province, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9607-026X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveHigh levels of self-efficacy (SE) in colorectal cancer (CRC) patients and/or caregivers enable patients to cope with cancer, reduce caregiver burden, and promote quality of life (QOL) in patients and caregivers alike. This review aims to (a) identify the SE theory sources covered by SE interventions or interventions, including targeting improved SE for CRC patients and/or caregivers, to guide future development of SE interventions; and (b) explore intervention effects based on SE theory through meta-analysis.

methodsUsing five electronic databases-CINAHL, Cochrane Library, Embase, PsycINFO, and PubMed-a systematic search was performed in April 2021 to identify English or Chinese literature that studied improving SE interventions for CRC patients and/or caregivers. Manual screening of the articles' references list was also performed.

resultsA total of 18 studies were found to be suitable and included in this review. Of the 18 studies that were included, 10 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) studies with 917 participants were eligible for meta-analysis. Interventions provide support for SE drawing on different sources of information. Performance accomplishment (PA) is the key source, with vicarious experience (VE) and verbal persuasion (VP) assisting in improving PA. Reducing negative emotional arousal (NEA) and improving positive emotional arousal (PEA) are also indispensable factors in improving SE. The meta-analysis results show that interventions based on the SE theory can bring about positive effects for CRC patients and/or caregivers.

conclusionsDifferent sources of information aimed at improving SE, covered by the interventions, including PA, VE, VP, NEA, and PEA, have been explored. Positive intervention outcomes that focused on improving SE for CRC patients and/or caregivers were identified and highlighted. For future SE interventions, we advocate choosing combination sources of SE information to design interventions. It is recommended that future SE improvement interventions should focus on improving PA, supplemented by increasing VE, while reducing NEA and providing useful VP.

Identifiers

PMID34707659
PMCPMC8545593

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.