SynthesisJournal of cancer survivorship : research and practice2026
Effects of dyadic interventions on psychological outcomes among cancer patients with active and non-active treatment: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Journal of cancer survivorship : research and practice, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Understanding meanings and lived experiences of spirituality among adults with cancer.Journal of psychosocial oncology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveCancer and its treatment can generate substantial psychological distress (depression and anxiety). The objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to explore the effectiveness of dyadic interventions on psychological outcomes in cancer patients with active and non-active treatment and to test subgroup analyses to explore the source of heterogeneity affecting effect sizes.
designSystematic searching across eight databases identified studies related to dyadic interventions for psychological outcomes of cancer patients published between 2007 and 2022. Rigorous inclusion and exclusion criteria were utilized. Random-effects models were used to compute effect sizes with Hedge's g, forest plot, and Q and I
resultsEleven primary studies were identified (938 patients with cancer, 56.14 ± 7.29 years old). Overall, dyadic interventions significantly improved depression (g = .36, 95% confidence interval .026 to .68, I
conclusionDyadic interventions appear to be effective among adults with cancer with active and non-active treatment. Additional research is needed to explore the efficacy of dyadic interventions among more diverse samples and to examine routes for integrating dyadic interventions into practice. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: Adult with cancer might participate in the dyadic intervention for improving psychological outcomes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39352669What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.