ReviewCancers2026
Psychological Resources in Adults with Cancer: A Systematic Review of Quantitative Studies.
Review in Cancers, 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND/
objectivesPatients facing cancer's challenges develop various coping strategies. This systematic review identifies the psychological resources that influence their mental health and quality of life.
methodsFollowing PRISMA guidelines, we searched Medline, PsycINFO, PubMed, Science Direct, Springerlink, and Wiley for empirical studies published between 2010 and 2025 for articles containing the term "cancer" and one or more terms relating to psychological resources. Including studies focused on peer-reviewed articles evaluating at least one psychological resource and one mental health outcome in adult cancer patients. A total of 95 studies (
resultsRisk of Bias in Non-randomized Studies-of Exposures (ROBINS-E) assessments of the risk of bias showed the overall quality of the included studies, with 89% of studies having a low or moderate risk of bias. The review identified 16 psychological resources. We described each resource's impact based on the strength of current empirical evidence. Optimism, resilience, hope, and self-compassion emerged as the most prominent predictors of reduced psychological distress. By analyzing study designs, these resources were organized into a functional hierarchy reflecting their specific roles within the coping process.
conclusionsBased on this categorization, we propose a conceptual model illustrating the interplay between these resources. This framework suggests a theoretical basis for future empirical validation and provides directions for designing targeted 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.