SynthesisPsycho-oncology2026
Narrative Therapy: A Systematic Review of Efficacy and Effectiveness for Improving Biopsychosocial Outcomes in People With Cancer.
Synthesis 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundNarrative therapy is a postmodern, culturally responsive approach to psychotherapy that may be well suited for people affected by cancer. However, evidence for its use is unclear with previous reviews focusing on qualitative outcomes, specific approaches, or specific outcomes.
aimTo conduct a systematic review to determine the efficacy/effectiveness of narrative therapy for people with cancer, and the factors which influence biopsychosocial treatment outcomes.
methodsWe conducted comprehensive searches of Medline, PsycInfo, Embase, Web of Science and Google Scholar to identify relevant studies and conducted a systematic review in accordance with PRISMA guidelines. Studies were included in the review if they investigated a narrative therapy intervention in a sample of adults (over 18 years) with cancer, reported biopsychosocial outcomes through primary quantitative data, and were published from 1990 onwards.
resultsNine studies met the inclusion criteria. All studies were RCTs or quasi-experimental and considered to have high risk of bias in multiple aspects of study design. Results supported narrative therapy as a potentially effective treatment for people with cancer to improve their biopsychosocial wellbeing, identifying group treatment, face-to-face delivery, and modification based on cancer stage as factors which may optimise treatment. However, efficacy could not be established due to a lack of high-quality controlled studies and therefore, these findings should be interpreted with caution.
conclusionNarrative therapy may be uniquely suitable for people with cancer due to its culturally sensitive, personalised approach which can address various biopsychosocial challenges. However, further high-quality evidence of its efficacy in this population is needed.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.