ArticlePloS one2023
Family cohesion predicts long-term health and well-being after losing a parent to cancer as a teenager: A nationwide population-based study.
Article in PloS one, 2023. 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.
- Psychotropic medication trajectories around parental bereavement and their association with suicide mortality among adolescents and young adults, a Swedish nationwide cohort study.Social psychiatry and psychiatric epidemiology · 2026Article
- Prolonged Grief-Related Symptoms Among Young Individuals After Loss of a Parent or Sibling to Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- An e-Learning Intervention for Professionals to Promote Family-Centered Cancer Care When a Significant Caregiver for Children Is at End of Life: Mixed Methods Evaluation Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundParentally bereaved children are at increased risk of negative consequences, and the mediating factors most consistently identified are found to be related to family function after the loss, including cohesion. However, existing evidence is limited, especially with respect to children and youths' own perception of family cohesion and its long-term effects on health and well-being. Therefore, the aim of this study was to investigate self-reported family cohesion the first year after the loss of a parent to cancer and its association to long-term psychological health and well-being among young adults that were bereaved during their teenage years. METHOD AND
participantsIn this nationwide population-based study, 622 of 851 (73%) young adults (aged 18-26) responded to a study-specific questionnaire six to nine years after losing a parent to cancer at the age of 13 to 16. Associations were assessed with modified Poisson regression.
resultsBereaved youth that reported poor family cohesion the first year after losing a parent to cancer had a higher risk of reporting symptoms of moderate to severe depression six to nine years after the loss compared to those reporting good family cohesion. They also had a higher risk of reporting low levels of well-being, symptoms of anxiety, problematic sleeping and emotional numbness once a week or more at the time of the survey. These results remained statistically significant after adjusting for a variety of possible confounding factors.
conclusionSelf-reported poor family cohesion the first year after the loss of a parent to cancer was strongly associated with long-term negative psychological health-related outcomes among bereaved youth. To pay attention to family cohesion and, if needed, to provide support to strengthen family cohesion in families facing bereavement might prevent long-term suffering for their teenage children.
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.