Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39165223›Full record

SynthesisCancer medicine2024

The efficacy of cognitive behavioral therapy for mental health and quality of life among individuals diagnosed with cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Alexander T Dils, Kathryn O'Keefe, Nada Dakka, Michelle Azar, Meiyan Chen, Anao Zhang

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Cancer medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
–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

16 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Pain catastrophizing, pain acceptance, and pain intensity among patients with cancer in Oman and Lebanon: a comparative cross-sectional study.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2026
    Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Observational
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Identifying Strategies for Strengthening Behavioral and Social Science Research Study Conduct.Journal of empirical research on human research ethics : JERHRE
    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

6 authors.

Alexander T DilsCentral Michigan University College of Medicine, Saginaw, Michigan, USA.
Kathryn O'KeefeCentral Michigan University College of Medicine, Saginaw, Michigan, USA.
Nada DakkaCentral Michigan University College of Medicine, Saginaw, Michigan, USA.
Michelle AzarCentral Michigan University College of Medicine, Saginaw, Michigan, USA.
Meiyan ChenThe University of Texas at Austin Steve Hicks School of Social Work, Austin, Texas, USA.
Anao ZhangThe University of Texas at Austin Steve Hicks School of Social Work, Austin, Texas, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-3199-1113

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveIt has long been documented that cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) has positive impacts on improving mental health (MH) and quality of life (QoL) in the general population, but investigations on its effect on cancer survivors remain limited, especially for QoL outcomes. The purpose of this meta-analysis is to investigate the effects of CBT as compared to control on cancer patients' MH and QoL outcomes. Control is defined in this study as standard therapy, waitlist control, and active/alternative therapy.

methodsIn total, 154 clinical trials creating a sample size of 1627 individuals were collected. Analysis focusing on MH and QoL excluded 29 clinical trials resulting in a final analysis of 132 clinical trials (and 1030 effect sizes). R Statistical Software (version 4.2.2) and the robumeta package were utilized to complete analysis, which entailed robust variance estimation (RVE) in intercept-only meta-regression, and univariate meta-regression (for moderator analysis).

resultsAcross 132 clinical trials and 1030 effect size estimates, we identified that CBT moderately improves MH and QoL in cancer patients d = 0.388, 95% CI 0.294-0.483, p < 0.001. Additionally, age and delivery format can influence the efficacy of CBT in this patient population.

conclusionsCBT statistically improves the MH and QoL psychosocial parameters in cancer patients with greater efficacy in younger patients. Important clinical and intervention-related factors, that is, age and delivery, should be considered when oncologists consider CBT as a psychotherapeutic intervention for individuals with cancer.

Indexed as

Cognitive Behavioral TherapyMental HealthNeoplasmsQuality of LifeCancer SurvivorsHumansTreatment Outcomecancer survivorcognitive behavioral therapymeta‐analysispatient‐reported outcomesupportive care

Identifiers

PMID39165223
PMCPMC11336377

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.