SynthesisSupportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer2024
The effectiveness of solution-focused therapy in cancer-related symptom management: a systematic review.
Synthesis in Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Efficacy of psychological interventions versus standard care for cancer pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2026Pooled it
- Navigating the shadow of fear: a qualitative study unveiling the lived experience of fear of cancer recurrence among Chinese gastric cancer survivors undergoing chemotherapy.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveSolution-focused therapy (SFT) as a psychoeducational support intervention has gained an increasing attention for alleviating complications associated with cancer. The aim of this review was to integrate and synthesize scientific evidence regarding the efficacy of SFT in the management of cancer-related symptoms.
methodsA systematic review was conducted, encompassing the exploration of five online databases-Web of Science, PubMed (including MEDLINE), CINAHL, Embase, and Scopus. Articles published from inception to December 2023 were retrieved. The review included all clinical trials and similar interventional studies assessing the impact of SFT on cancer-related symptoms. Relevant data were extracted from eligible studies following quality appraisals using appropriate methodological tools. The review results were presented in a narrative format due to the impossibility of conducting a meta-analysis.
resultsA total of 239 studies were identified during the search process, of which eight articles met the inclusion criteria. The overall sample size comprised 555 patients with cancer that were mostly female (n = 386). Four studies employed randomized controlled trials (RCT), while the remaining four utilized the non-RCT method. SFT-based interventions demonstrated effectiveness in addressing stress, anxiety, depression, somatization, cancer-related fatigue, pain catastrophizing, and negative coping. Additionally, they improved psychological well-being, hope, positive coping, self-efficacy, quality of life, and sexual quality of life among cancer patients.
conclusionsVarious SFT-based interventions have been shown to be effective in managing cancer-related symptoms and can be considered valuable additions to routine care, complementing medication therapy and other therapeutic measures to alleviate patients' suffering associated with cancer. Systematic review registration number (PROSPERO): CRD42023413910.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39557681What 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.