SynthesisSupportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer2026
Resilience interventions for stress-related health outcomes in patients with cancer: Findings from a systematic review of randomized controlled trials.
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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveThis systematic review aimed to synthesize evidence from randomized controlled trials evaluating the effectiveness of resilience interventions in improving stress-related health outcomes among patients with cancer and to provide a theoretical and practical foundation for advancing non-pharmacological interventions in nursing practice.
methodsThis study adhered to the 2020 Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. A literature search was conducted using five major databases: PubMed, EBSCO, Embase, Web of Science, and CINAHL. In addition, a manual search was performed using Google Scholar. Two independent researchers assessed the methodological quality of the included studies using the Revised Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomized trials (RoB 2). This study has been registered in PROSPERO (registration number: CRD420261283027).
resultsThe 33 included randomized controlled trials reported 70 outcome measures across 3,614 patients with cancer. The methodological quality of the included studies ranged from low risk to high risk, with most studies classified as having some concerns or a high risk of bias. Among the 19 outcomes assessing depression, 12 showed significant post-intervention reductions. Of the 21 outcomes evaluating anxiety, 16 showed significant post-intervention reductions. Of the 26 outcomes related to quality of life, 23 showed significant post-intervention improvements. Finally, among the 4 outcomes assessing perceived stress, 3 showed significant post-intervention reductions.
conclusionOverall, resilience interventions are associated with improvements in stress-related health outcomes in patients with cancer. However, substantial heterogeneity in intervention content, delivery, and outcome reporting across studies precluded quantitative synthesis. Future research should prioritize developing standardized resilience intervention programs and conducting methodologically rigorous randomized controlled trials to validate the practical benefits of resilience interventions in nursing practice.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42862385What 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.