SynthesisJournal of clinical nursing2026
The Effect of Theory-Guided Positive Psychological Interventions for Patients With Breast Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Synthesis in Journal of clinical nursing, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comment on "The Effect of Theory-Guided Positive Psychological Interventions for Patients With Breast Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis".Journal of clinical nursing · 2026Article
- Article
- Family Disclosure of a Cancer Diagnosis to Patients.JAMA network open · 2026Article
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
aimsTo critically assess the impact of theory-guided positive psychological interventions on the quality of life of breast cancer patients and survivors.
designSystematic review and meta-analysis.
methodsA comprehensive literature search was conducted across seven electronic databases from inception to August 2024. Randomised controlled trials that examined the effects of theory-guided positive psychological interventions on adult breast cancer patients or survivors and reported quality of life outcomes were included. Screening, data extraction and critical appraisal were independently performed by the reviewers using the revised Cochrane risk-of-bias tool (RoB2). A meta-analysis was conducted using RevMan Web. The study was reported following the PRISMA 2020 Statement.
resultsFive randomised controlled trials were included. Only two of these studies showed a low risk of bias across all quality measures. The meta-analysis demonstrated a significant improvement in quality of life following theory-guided positive psychological interventions, with low heterogeneity. Subgroup analyses revealed that interventions lasting either less than or longer than 3 weeks, and both group-based and individual-based formats, had positive effects on quality of life. Additional psychological benefits were observed including reductions in depressive symptoms, anxiety, perceived stress and improvements in post-traumatic growth, resilience, hope and perceived benefits. One study also reported improvements in sleep quality.
conclusionThe findings demonstrate that theory-guided positive psychological interventions can potentially significantly improve quality of life in breast cancer patients. However, the limited number of studies underscores the need for further high-quality research to validate these findings and identify the most effective intervention characteristics. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: Our systematic review highlights that theory-guided positive psychological interventions show promise as an effective strategy for improving the quality of life in breast cancer patients. These interventions can enhance psychosocial support strategies, paving the way for better-informed approaches that lead to improved patient outcomes. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: No patient or public contribution.
trial registrationThe systematic review and meta-analysis had been registered with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) under the registration ID number: CRD42024581382.
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.