ArticleAsia-Pacific journal of oncology nursing2024
Interrelation between dyadic coping and psychological resilience among cervical cancer couples in Northwest China: An Actor-Partner interdependence model.
Article in Asia-Pacific journal of oncology nursing, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Dyadic relationship experience in Chinese patients with advanced cancer and their spouses: A longitudinal qualitative study.Asia-Pacific journal of oncology nursing · 2026Article
- Dyadic Coping and Illness Uncertainty in Cancer Patient-Caregiver Dyads: Interactive Mechanisms, Heterogeneity, and Integrated Intervention Directions-A Narrative Review (2021-2025).Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Cross-lagged analysis of financial toxicity and psychological distress between breast cancer patients and spouses during chemotherapy: an actor-partner interdependence model.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- The interplay and influence of anxiety and depression among men with early-stage prostate cancer and their close allies.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: This study aimed to explore how dyadic coping (DC) influences the psychological resilience (PR) levels of patients with cervical cancer (CC) and their spouses. Methods: From April to June 2024, this cross-sectional study involved 177 dyads of patients with CC and their spouses from the gynecology and oncology wards of two tertiary hospitals in Xinjiang. Data were collected through questionnaires on demographic information, clinical characteristics, the Resilience Scale, and the Dyadic Coping Inventory, all of which were self-report measures. The results were thoroughly analyzed utilizing the Actor-Partner Interdependence Mediation Model. Results: The patients had a mean age of 49.94 ± 8.05 years (range: 26-64), with the majority being at stage II of CC. Their spouses had a mean age of 51.90 ± 8.02 years (range: 27-65). DC scores averaged 105.50 ± 23.98 for patients and 103.34 ± 22.26 for spouses, while PR scores were 63.51 ± 19.68 for patients and 67.44 ± 18.97 for spouses. Positive DC, which significantly correlated with higher levels of PR, was observed in patients with CC and their spouses ( Conclusions: Patients with CC and their spouses' PR is significantly influenced by both partners' DC behaviors. When both partners used positive coping strategies, their PR increased. Conversely, negative DC behaviors affected only patients' PR, possibly because of self-concealment and communication barriers, which may explain the lack of a reciprocal impact. Nurses should identify couples at risk for negative DC and implement resilience interventions to encourage both partners' engagement in positive coping.
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.