ArticleSupportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer2023
Modality preferences for health behaviour interventions for post-treatment cancer survivors: a theoretical investigation.
Article in Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Does adding coaching calls into an online lifestyle intervention for cancer survivors make it more acceptable and feasible than a self-guided version?Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2026Trial
- Spanish Society of Medical Oncology recommendations for comprehensive assessment and care of cancer survivors' needs.Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2025Review
- Working toward Personalized Intervention Advice: A Survey Study on Preference Heterogeneity in Patients with Breast Cancer-Related Fatigue.MDM policy & practiceArticle
- Enhancing wellbeing in cancer care: Engagement in smart-messaging programmes for symptom management.Digital healthArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposesUser preferences for how programs are delivered are an important consideration when developing healthy living interventions. The aim of this study was to investigate (a) if cancer survivors prefer telephone or internet delivery for a healthy living intervention and (b) what factors were associated with delivery preference.
methodsAustralian cancer survivors (18 + years) were invited to complete an online or hardcopy cross-sectional survey measuring social and clinical demographic factors and validated measures of self-efficacy, health literacy, and social support.
resultsOf the 168 respondents, the majority were female (n = 147, 92%) and breast cancer survivors (n = 122, 80%) and preferred internet delivery (n = 109, 65%). Participants who preferred internet delivery had a longer time since diagnosis (M = 9.85 years, SD = 8.20) compared to those who preferred telephone (M = 6.80 years, SD = 5.54), p = .03. However, logistic regression analyses demonstrated that no other variables (age, gender, socio-economic status, BMI, education, self-efficacy, health literacy, nor social support) had a direct association on delivery preference.
conclusionsCancer survivors appear to prefer internet delivery to telephone, particularly for those further along the survivorship trajectory. Future intervention development should therefore consider the internet modality for delivering accessible health interventions and offer the program to long-term cancer survivors. Whether these findings are replicable in the current post-pandemic phase is an important avenue for future research.
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.