Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 457

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 6 of the 6 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Social Support and the Cancer Patient: Conceptual and Methodologic Issues

Wortman, Camille B.·1984·Cancer

Abstract

In this paper, an attempt has been made to provide an overview of the major issues facing cancer researchers who are interested in the conceptualization and measurement of social support. Taken as a whole, the literature reflects a growing appreciation for the complexity of the social-support construct, and a need for greater conceptual and research specificity. The following issues were discussed: (1) the importance of measuring support in a way that will permit assessment of distinct types of support (e.g., emotional support, advice) by distinct providers (e.g., spouse, physician) since available evidence suggests that the impact of support is strongly affected by these factors; (2) the importance of using a multimethod approach to support measurement which includes both structural aspects and subjective assessments of the adequacy of the support network; and the problems inherent in assuming that structural variables alone are an indication of the adequacy of support; (3) the importance of considering negative as well as positive support, since there is evidence suggesting that such behaviors may be very prevalent in the interactions between cancer patients and those in their support network that they may have strong influence on subsequent health outcomes; (4) the need to consider the perspective of the provider as well as the recipient in obtaining judgments of the effectiveness of particular kinds of support, given the evidence that providers sometimes make attempts to be supportive that are regarded as unhelpful; (5) the importance of focusing on actual utilization as well as availability of the support network, since an understanding of how people mobilize their support networks has important theoretical and practical implications; and, finally, (6) the importance of studying more explicit, specific behaviors that occur between cancer patients and those in their support network, as well as more general judgments regarding whether support is adequate. Investigators in the social support area agree that it is time to move beyond demonstrations of a relationship between support and health outcomes to a more careful explication of the processes underlying support. This review highlights the importance of designing research that will shed light on the precise mechanisms through which support influences health outcomes. Hopefully, such research will clarify how social support interacts with other important psychosocial variables such as coping strategies and self-esteem.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS)

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/cncr.1984.53.s10.2339

Cites

6 of 6 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 6 references

Cited by

See all 457

Metadata

Authors
Wortman, C. B.
Venue
Cancer
Publisher
Wiley
Published
1984-05
Volume
53
Issue
S10
Pages
2339-2360
ISSN
  • 0008-543X (ISSN-L)
  • 1097-0142
OpenAlex
W195160731
Cited by
457
References
6
FWCI
6.57
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Social Support and the Cancer Patient: Conceptual and Methodologic Issues. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/cncr.1984.53.s10.2339
The paper
Wortman, C. B. (1984). Social Support and the Cancer Patient: Conceptual and Methodologic Issues. Cancer. https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.1984.53.s10.2339

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.