ArticleFrontiers in psychology2024
The novel manualized RELIEVE-group treatment for burdened relatives of cancer patients: a feasibility study.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Emotion Regulation Interventions for Cancer Patients and Their Relatives: A Systematic Review.Cancer medicine · 2026Pooled it
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
Introduction: The experience of cancer among relatives is characterized by an increase in anxiety and depression, stress, and a reduction in quality of life. However, there is a paucity of psychosocial support programmes for relatives and a dearth of evidence-based, manualized interventions. Accordingly, the present study aims to assess the acceptability, defined as participant drop-out and satisfaction, and feasibility, in terms of mental health improvement, of a novel manualized psycho-educational group intervention. Methods: The manual was developed on the basis of previous research into psychotherapy. A total of 33 relatives of cancer patients were recruited from the West German Tumor Center and participated in the five modules of the RELIEVE treatment which included an introduction, communication skills, stress and anxiety management and self-care. The primary outcome was assessed using a range of measures, including anxiety (GAD-7), depression (PHQ-8), stress (PSQ), self-efficacy (SES), need for support (SCNSP&C-G), and quality of life (WGOQOL-BREF) before and after the completion of the treatment programme. A paired samples T-test was employed to assess the feasibility of the treatment, with pre- and post-scores being compared. The secondary outcome of treatment acceptance was evaluated by calculating the drop-out rate and scoring a treatment satisfaction questionnaire. Results: A high level of satisfaction was reported by participants. The drop-out rate for the treatment was minimal, at only 2.86%. Following the completion of the treatment programme, there were significant improvements in anxiety, depression and stress scores, as well as an improvement in quality of life. No significant improvements were observed in self-efficacy, work and social security needs, and quality of life in the social relationships domain. Discussion: The RELIEVE intervention demonstrated high feasibility and acceptance among emotionally affected relatives of cancer patients, addressing a gap in previous interventions that were often limited in scope and lacked standardised manuals. Conclusion: This feasibility study on treatment acceptance underlines the importance of measures that are tailored to the specific needs of cancer patients' relatives, and of integrating them into the general healthcare system.
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.