SynthesisMedicine2026
The impact of psychological interventions on anxiety and depression in cancer pain patients: A meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Medicine, 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
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCancer pain is frequently accompanied by anxiety and depression, which severely impair patients' quality of life. Although psychological interventions are widely applied in clinical practice, their overall effect on alleviating anxiety and depression among cancer pain patients remains to be systematically evaluated.
methodsThis meta-analysis strictly followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses 2020 guidelines. Randomized controlled trials of psychological intervention for anxiety and depression in cancer pain patients were searched across PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, the Cochrane Library, Wanfang, China national knowledge infrastructure, VIP, and China Biomedical Literature Database from inception to May 21, 2025. According to the Cochrane systematic assessment method, literature screening, quality evaluation, and information extraction were carried out by 2 independent reviewers. Meta-analysis was conducted with RevMan 5.3 software, including heterogeneity test, effect size pooling, sensitivity analysis, subgroup analysis, and publication bias assessment.
resultsA total of 11 randomized controlled trials involving 879 patients (440 in the intervention group and 439 in the control group) were included. Pooled analysis showed that psychological interventions significantly reduced anxiety scores (weighted mean difference = -8.82, 95% confidence interval [-10.52, -7.12], P < .001) and depression scores (weighted mean difference = -9.39, 95% confidence interval [-11.79, -6.98], P < .001) in cancer pain patients compared with conventional care. Sensitivity analysis confirmed the robustness of the results, and prespecified subgroup analyses (by intervention duration, mean age, sex ratio) failed to identify significant sources of heterogeneity. Funnel plots combined with Begg and Egger tests indicated no significant publication bias.
conclusionPsychological intervention can effectively improve the anxiety and depression of cancer patients during chemotherapy, and future studies need to pay attention to the impact of factors such as the type of cancer, cancer pain, patient population, and specific psychological interventions.
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.