ArticlePsycho-oncology2025
Investigating the Pre-Implementation Facilitators and Barriers of the Implementation of the Fear of Recurrence Therapy (FORT) Intervention in Canadian Cancer Centers.
Article in Psycho-oncology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Adaptation and usability study of the fear of cancer recurrence therapy for parents of survivors of childhood cancer (Parent-FORT).Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
- Investigating the Pre-Implementation Facilitators and Barriers of the Implementation of the Fear of Recurrence Therapy (FORT) Intervention in Canadian Cancer Centers.Psycho-oncology · 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
19 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesFear of cancer recurrence (FCR) is the number one unmet psychosocial need of cancer survivors. Fortunately, several interventions have demonstrated their efficacy in reducing FCR in randomized controlled trials (RCTs), including the Fear of Recurrence Therapy (FORT) intervention, a 6-week, cognitive-existential group therapy. However, few interventions are implemented in routine clinical care. The present study aims to document pre-implementation facilitators and barriers from the perspectives of clinicians and decision-makers to prepare the implementation of FORT in Canadian cancer centers.
methodsThis mixed-methods comparative case study evaluated the process of implementing FORT in 5 Canadian clinical sites. Prior to implementation, we conducted individual semi-structured interviews with clinicians and decision-makers at each site, based on the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR), to uncover barriers and facilitators of implementation. Content analysis was performed on the interviews using the NVivo template provided by the CFIR.
resultsWe interviewed 20 managers/decision-makers and clinicians who reported facilitators common to all sites: (1) an awareness of the need for an FCR intervention; (2) the perceived benefit of FORT's group format to reduce waitlists for individual FCR services; and (3) that offering an evidence-based intervention was within the mission of their institution. All sites identified staff shortage and concerns for equitable access to FORT as the main barriers. Each site had additional unique barriers.
conclusionThis analysis of facilitators and barriers will directly contribute to the selection of site-specific strategies and tools to optimize the implementation of FORT.
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.