ArticleSupportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer2025
Assessing the feasibility, acceptability, and preliminary health behavior outcomes of a community-based virtual group health coaching for cancer survivors program.
Article in Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
- The Case for Integration of Health Coaching within Integrative Oncology - Needs, Outcomes, Models, and Standards.Current oncology reports · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe primary purpose was to assess the feasibility and acceptability of a group health coaching (GHC) program with cancer patients and survivors; secondarily, to determine the preliminary effects of GHC on several behavioral lifestyle factors.
methodsGHC was provided to people diagnosed with cancer via videoconference by trained health coaches across six GHC sessions over a 3-month period. Qualitative and quantitative data were collected. Data on recruitment, attrition, attendance, fidelity, retention, safety, and barriers and facilitators to implementation were assessed. Participant-reported outcomes collected via surveys included physical activity, eating habits, perceived stress, anxiety, depression, sleep, and quality of life, followed by post-program focus groups and in-depth interviews. Survey results were analyzed using repeated measures multilevel modeling. Qualitative data was analyzed using inductive thematic analysis.
resultsOverall, 26 participants with a variety of cancer types attended an average of 74% of coaching sessions. The intervention was feasible to implement and found acceptable by participants and health coaches. Over the course of the intervention, there was a moderate increase in total weekly physical activity minutes (baseline = 365.25, follow-up = 510.30, p = 0.032, d = 0.50), and a small increase in weekly moderate-vigorous physical activity frequency (baseline = 4.07 bouts, follow-up = 5.44 bouts, p = 0.045, d = 0.39). Additionally, a moderate increase was found in functional well-being (baseline = 16.30, follow-up = 18.93, p < 0.001, d = 0.50). CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: GHC may be a feasible and acceptable way to promote behavior change for physical activity in cancer patients and survivors, reducing cancer burden and enhancing functional well-being.
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.