SynthesisPsycho-oncology2025
Effectiveness of Psychological Interventions in Improving Relationship Functioning Among Couples Coping With Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Synthesis in Psycho-oncology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Relationship Values and Committed Actions Among Couples Coping with Prostate Cancer: A Qualitative Study.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2026Article
- Health literacy correlates, barriers, and adherence in post-prostatectomy sexual rehabilitation: cross-sectional findings from China.Frontiers in public health · 2026Observational
- Living with brain metastasis - a qualitative study of patients' and family members' coping strategies.International journal of qualitative studies on health and well-being · 2025Article
- Exploring the role of psychological flexibility in relationship functioning among couples coping with prostate cancer: a cross-sectional study.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2025Article
- Article
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
objectiveThere is an increasing amount of literature acknowledging the significance of addressing the psychosocial impact of prostate cancer (PCa) on couples' relationship functioning and well-being. However, research on developing and evaluating psychological interventions for individuals and couples coping with PCa remains limited. This systematic review aimed to critically evaluate and synthesise the effectiveness of psychological interventions in improving the relationship functioning of couples affected by PCa and to identify the moderating role of several methodological characteristics of intervention studies.
methodsFive databases MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Embase, Global Health, and Cochrane Library were searched up to September 2024. Twenty-three studies with randomised trials and a total sample size of 3333 participants were included. Random effects meta-analyses for relationship functioning, sensitivity analysis for outliers, and publication bias analysis were conducted.
resultsThe results showed that psychological interventions had a non-significant trivial effect (g = 0.06, p = 0.328) on improving relationship functioning among couples coping with PCa. Subgroup analyses identified two potential moderators: firstly, the intervention format (conjoint vs. individual; p = 0.005), and secondly, the intervention frequency (session number < 6 vs. session number ≥ 6; p = 0.004).
conclusionsThe findings suggest that more high-quality intervention studies are needed to improve the relationship functioning of those affected by PCa, with screening processes to select more representative samples at entry. The implications for clinical practice highlight the need to tailor interventions to the specific needs of couples coping with PCa.
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.