Trial reportPsycho-oncology2026
Randomized Controlled Trial of the Meaning-Making Intervention (MMi) in Patients Newly Diagnosed With Advanced Cancer: Full Trial.
Trial report in Psycho-oncology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThis study aimed to test whether the Meaning-Making intervention (MMi) increases the sense of meaning in life in people newly diagnosed with any type of advanced cancer.
methodsWe conducted a 3-arm parallel randomized controlled trial with 239 patients newly diagnosed (< 6 months) with advanced cancer (stages III or IV), assigned to either an experimental group (n = 80), an attention-control group (n = 80), or a usual care control group (n = 79). Meaning in life (primary outcome), anxiety and depression, quality of life, existential wellbeing, and posttraumatic growth were measured at 2 months post randomization with follow-up at 4 and 6 months.
resultsThere were no significant (p < 0.05) inter-group differences in FACIT-Sp-12 Meaning subscale scores 2 months post-randomization in independent two-sample t-tests (experimental group vs. usual care p = 0.65; experimental group vs. attention control p = 0.94), nor at 2, 4, and 6 months post-randomization using a mixed effect linear regression model and adjusting for baseline characteristics and random effect of time (p = 0.55-0.99). In exploratory analyses, stage III experimental group participants seemed to present higher post-traumatic growth on the PTGI 2 months post-randomization than patients in the AC (p = 0.02), but this was not significant when applying a Bonferroni correction for multiple comparisons. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: In this three-arm randomized controlled trial, the MMi did not produce improvements on the primary or secondary outcomes compared with AC or UC. There may be some indications of a signal for benefit for patients with stage III cancer, which warrant follow-up but cannot be considered definitive. Future work should prioritize targeting, dose, timing, and contextual moderators to clarify when, and for whom, meaning-focused approaches are most effective.
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.