ArticleBMJ open2023
Effectiveness of brief psychosocial support for patients with cancer and their relatives: a quasi-experimental evaluation of cancer counselling centres.
Article in BMJ open, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Impact of patient education and care on quality of life and mental well-being in cancer patients undergoing radiotherapy: a systematic review.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2026Pooled it
- Effect of nurse-Led psychosocial intervention on body image distress and treatment compliance among patients undergoing treatment of cancer: A randomized controlled trial.Journal of education and health promotion · 2024Article
- Patient information, communication and competence empowerment in oncology: Results and learnings from the PIKKO study.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2023Article
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
objectivesThe aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of brief psychosocial support for patients with cancer and their relatives regarding their mental health.
designQuasi-experimental controlled trial with measurements at three time points (baseline, after 2 weeks and after 12 weeks).
settingThe intervention group (IG) was recruited at two cancer counselling centres in Germany. The control group (CG) included patients with cancer or relatives who did not seek support.
participantsIn total, n=885 participants were recruited and n=459 were eligible for the analysis (IG, n=264; CG, n=195).
interventionOne to two psychosocial support sessions (approximately hour) provided by a psycho-oncologist or social worker. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was distress. The secondary outcomes were anxiety and depressive symptoms, well-being, cancer-specific and generic quality of life (QoL), self-efficacy and fatigue.
resultsThe linear mixed model analysis showed significant differences between IG and CG at follow-up for distress (d=0.36), p=0.001), depressive (d=0.22), p=0.005) and anxiety symptoms (d=0.22), p=0.003), well-being (d=0.26, p=0.002), QoL (QoL mental; d=0.26, p=0.003), self-efficacy (d=0.21, p=0.011) and QoL (global; d=0.27, p=0.009). The changes were not significant for QoL (physical; d=0.04, p=0.618), cancer-specific QoL (symptoms; d=0.13, p=0.093), cancer-specific QoL (functional; d=0.08, p=0.274) and fatigue (d=0.04, p=0.643).
conclusionThe results suggest that brief psychosocial support is associated with the improvement of mental health of patients with cancer and their relatives after 3 months. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: DRKS00015516.
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.