SynthesisSupportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer2026
Digital and AI-enhanced psychosocial interventions in breast cancer patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeDigital and AI-supported psychosocial interventions are increasingly implemented to address psychological distress among women with breast cancer. However, their effectiveness and sustainability remain uncertain. This review aimed to systematically evaluate randomised controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the impact of digital and AI-enhanced psychosocial interventions on stress, anxiety, depression, and health-related quality of life (HRQoL).
methodsFollowing PROSPERO registration and PRISMA 2020 guidelines, comprehensive searches of multiple databases were conducted up to June 2025. Eligible studies included RCTs involving breast cancer populations and reporting validated psychosocial outcomes. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane RoB 2.0 tool, and certainty of evidence was evaluated with GRADE. Random-effects meta-analyses using standardised mean differences (Hedges' g) were conducted to pool outcomes measured with different instruments.
resultsThirty-five RCTs (n ≈ 7551 participants) met inclusion criteria. Pooled analyses indicated modest but consistent reductions in stress, anxiety, and depressive symptoms, alongside improvements in HRQoL. Interventions grounded in cognitive behavioural therapy, mindfulness, or psychoeducation produced the most reliable outcomes. AI-assisted and blended formats tended to show stronger effects compared with static or minimally interactive platforms. However, heterogeneity in intervention design, short follow-up periods, reliance on self-reported outcomes, and small single-centre samples limited certainty. Cultural adaptation and representation from low- and middle-income countries were minimal.
conclusionDigital and AI-supported psychosocial interventions show promise in reducing distress and improving HRQoL among women with breast cancer. Evidence certainty remains moderate, constrained by methodological limitations. Larger, multicentre trials with longer follow-up and diverse populations are needed to establish sustainability, generalisability, and clinical integration. RELEVANCE: These findings suggest that digital and AI-enhanced psychosocial interventions may serve as adjuncts to conventional care, with potential to improve access to supportive oncology services. Further high-quality, long-term studies are needed before informing guidelines, policy, or widespread implementation.
trial registrationPROSPERO (CRD420251074813; registered 16 June 2025).
Indexed as
Identifiers
41949762What 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.