ArticlePsycho-oncology2022
Optimizing use of written peer support as a supportive resource in cancer: Focus group insights.
Article in Psycho-oncology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effects of expressive helping writing during stem cell transplant: Randomized controlled trial.Health psychology : official journal of the Division of Health Psychology, American Psychological Association · 2025Trial
- The Decision-Making Experience of Self-Management Behaviors in Home Peritoneal Dialysis for Patients with Diabetic Nephropathy: A Qualitative Study Using the Theory of Planned Behavior.Patient preference and adherence · 2025Article
- Optimizing use of written peer support as a supportive resource in cancer: Focus group insights.Psycho-oncology · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors at 8 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
purposeCancer survivors frequently describe wanting to learn from others who have had similar diagnoses or treatments (peer support). We conducted focus groups to investigate hematopoietic stem cell transplant survivors' attitudes and preferences regarding accessing written peer support through a website. Although written peer support does not allow for interpersonal interactions with peers, it could increase transplant recipients' access to evidence-based benefits of informational and emotional peer support.
methodsWe conducted four videoconference focus groups with 34 adult transplant survivors who were diverse in their medical and sociodemographic characteristics and geographic location. Discussions were recorded, transcribed, and content analyzed.
resultsMany participants reported need for information about transplant beyond what they received from their healthcare providers. Needs varied across participants, as did preferences for characteristics and timing of information optimally provided through peer support. Participants were enthusiastic about the value of written peer support but emphasized that it should be delivered in a way that accommodates variation in transplant experiences, underscores its trustworthiness, and pairs it with useful psychoeducational content.
conclusionsFindings provide guidance for making written peer support an accessible, supportive resource for transplant survivors. Future research should evaluate personalized online delivery of written peer support paired with psychoeducational content that enhances its benefits. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: Written peer support delivered online could be a useful, valued resource for transplant survivors.
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.