Evidence mapPaperPMID 41388890Full record

ArticleTranslational behavioral medicine2025

Peer support programming among women at-risk for or surviving breast cancer: Facilitators and barriers to community-based patient navigation.

Muriel R Statman, Marcelo M Sleiman, Duye Liu, Anthony J Zisa, Adina Fleischmann, Kenneth P Tercyak

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Translational behavioral medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Muriel R StatmanLombardi Comprehensive Cancer Center, Georgetown University Medical Center, Washington, DC, United States.
Marcelo M SleimanLombardi Comprehensive Cancer Center, Georgetown University Medical Center, Washington, DC, United States.
Duye LiuLombardi Comprehensive Cancer Center, Georgetown University Medical Center, Washington, DC, United States.
Anthony J ZisaLombardi Comprehensive Cancer Center, Georgetown University Medical Center, Washington, DC, United States.
Adina FleischmannSharsheret, Teaneck, NJ, United States.
Kenneth P TercyakLombardi Comprehensive Cancer Center, Georgetown University Medical Center, Washington, DC, United States.ORCID 0000-0003-0274-556X

Funding

Tissue Culture and Biobanking Shared ResourceP30CA051008 · GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY · 1990 to 2025
$20.3M
CDC HHS U58DP005408National Cancer Institute at the National Institutes of Health P30CA051008NCCDPHP CDC HHS U58 DP005408NCI NIH HHS P30 CA051008
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPeer support (PS) programs offer care to women at-risk for and surviving breast cancer to improve their quality of life (QoL). PURPOSE: This study evaluated a cancer-focused community-based organization's (CBO) one-on-one and no-cost PS program to identify its uptake and outcomes.

methodsA secondary analysis was conducted among N = 1054 breast cancer previvors and survivors who contacted the CBO for information and support: outcomes were assessed 30 days later. Associations among demographic/clinical factors and the offer, uptake, and outcomes of PS were analyzed.

resultsIn this sample, N = 930 women (88.2%) were breast cancer survivors. PS was offered to N = 807 women (76.6%). Logistic regression demonstrated increased odds of being offered PS among those who were younger (odds ratio [OR] = 1.24), with lower household incomes (OR = 1.37), and who found the CBO more beneficial for themselves and their families (e.g. OR = 1.19). Of those offered PS, N = 304 (37.7%) utilized it. PS utilization was more likely among mothers (OR = 1.57), breast cancer previvors (OR = 1.59), and those with lower QoL (OR = 1.18). Women who utilized PS generally reported positive experiences (Mean = 44.4/50): younger age and positive experience were associated with better PS outcome (P's ≤ 0.03). Among women who did not utilize PS, commonly reported challenges included time (17.5%) and discomfort sharing personal information (9.8%). Other barriers (63.9%) analyzed qualitatively referenced lack of need or interest, time constraints, and existing support networks.

conclusionsPS programming was well-received among the one-third of women who participated, especially younger women and with those lower QoL. Barriers to utilizing PS could be addressed to enhance its reach and impact.

Indexed as

Breast NeoplasmsCancer SurvivorsPatient NavigationPeer GroupSocial SupportAdultAgedFemaleHumansMiddle AgedQuality of Lifebreast cancercommunity-based organizationpatient navigationpeer supportquality of life

Identifiers

PMID41388890
PMCPMC12701418

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.