ArticlePsycho-oncology2026
A Mixed Methods Evaluation of Psychological Skills Training for Level 1 Cancer Care Staff.
Article 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe need for psychological skills training among the cancer workforce has been recognised since NHS recommendations (2004) suggested that more holistic support is needed to address the psychosocial impact of cancer. Previous research has focused on the development of training for clinical staff, however with supportive roles (such as Care Navigators) developing to include increased patient contact. This service evaluation aims to address the gaps in training for this staff group.
aimsWe aimed to evaluate a one-day training package developed and delivered at Calderdale and Huddersfield NHS Foundation Trust to support the improvement of psychological skills and staff wellbeing among supportive and assistive staff.
methodsThe effectiveness of training was assessed using pre-post self-rated competency scales, standardised wellbeing measures, and semi-structured interview data analysed using thematic analysis.
resultsPsychological skills training significantly improved staff's self-perceived competency in identifying and supporting psychological distress. Wellbeing measures indicated no change, although interview data suggested a positive impact on wellbeing. Thematic analysis indicated that the training was valued by staff, increasing their confidence, knowledge and skills, motivating them to develop further. Some staff remained less confident in their ability to address suicidality and would benefit from further support through extra training or supervision.
conclusionsThe findings from this service evaluation suggest this training package may benefit the psychological skills of those in supportive and assistive roles, and that this was experienced positively by staff. Further implementation and evaluation is warranted before generalising these findings to routine clinical practice.
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.