Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38592764›Full record

ArticleJMIR cancer2024

Evaluation of the e-Mental Health Intervention Make It Training From Patients' Perspectives: Qualitative Analysis Within the Reduct Trial.

Julia Barbara Krakowczyk, Femke Truijens, Martin Teufel, Tania Lalgi, Jana Heinen, Caterina Schug, Yesim Erim, Michael Pantförder, Johanna Graf, Alexander Bäuerle

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR cancer, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

10 authors.

Julia Barbara KrakowczykClinic for Psychosomatic Medicine and Psychotherapy, LVR-University Hospital Essen, University of Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8543-9773
Femke TruijensDepartment of Psychology, Educational and Child Studies, Erasmus University Rotterdam, Rotterdam, Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0790-7003
Martin TeufelClinic for Psychosomatic Medicine and Psychotherapy, LVR-University Hospital Essen, University of Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2120-1840
Tania LalgiClinic for Psychosomatic Medicine and Psychotherapy, LVR-University Hospital Essen, University of Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0006-1174-0794
Jana HeinenDepartment of Psychosomatic Medicine and Psychotherapy, University Hospital Tübingen, Eberhard Karls University Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0009-5661-2325
Caterina SchugDepartment of Psychosomatic Medicine and Psychotherapy, University Hospital Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander-University Erlangen-Nürnberg, Erlangen, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0003-1936-3039
Yesim ErimDepartment of Psychosomatic Medicine and Psychotherapy, University Hospital Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander-University Erlangen-Nürnberg, Erlangen, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8215-1798
Michael PantförderFraunhofer Institute for Software and Systems Engineering, Dortmund, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7672-0632
Johanna GrafDepartment of Psychosomatic Medicine and Psychotherapy, University Hospital Tübingen, Eberhard Karls University Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0009-5077-6038
Alexander BäuerleClinic for Psychosomatic Medicine and Psychotherapy, LVR-University Hospital Essen, University of Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1488-8592

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMake It Training is an e-mental health intervention designed for individuals with cancer that aims to reduce psychological distress and improve disease-related coping and quality of life.

objectiveThis study evaluated the experienced usefulness and usability of the web-based Make It Training intervention using a qualitative approach.

methodsIn this study, semistructured interviews were conducted with participants at different cancer stages and with different cancer entities. All participants had previously taken part in the Reduct trial, a randomized controlled trial that assessed the efficacy of the Make It Training intervention. The data were coded deductively by 2 independent researchers and analyzed iteratively using thematic codebook analysis.

resultsAnalysis of experienced usefulness resulted in 4 themes (developing coping strategies to reduce psychological distress, improvement in quality of life, Make It Training vs traditional psychotherapy, and integration into daily life) with 11 subthemes. Analysis of experienced usability resulted in 3 themes (efficiency and accessibility, user-friendliness, and recommendations to design the Make It Training intervention to be more appealing) with 6 subthemes. Make It Training was evaluated as a user-friendly intervention helpful for developing functional coping strategies to reduce psychological distress and improve quality of life. The consensus regarding Make It Training was that it was described as a daily companion that integrates well into daily life and that it has the potential to be routinely implemented within oncological health care either as a stand-alone intervention or in addition to psychotherapy.

conclusionse-Mental health interventions such as Make It Training can target both the prevention of mental health issues and health promotion. Moreover, they offer a cost-efficient and low-threshold option to receive psycho-oncological support.

Indexed as

cancerdigital healtheHealthoncologypsycho-oncologyReduct trial

Identifiers

PMID38592764
PMCPMC11040444

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.