Cited by 35Childhood Cancer Survivors' Quality of LifeDigital Mental Health InterventionsCancer survivorship and care

A community‐based trial of a psychosocial eHealth intervention for parents of children with cancer

Canter, Kimberly S., McIntyre, Rebecca, Babb, Rebecca, Ramirez, Alejandra Perez, Vega, Gabriela, Lewis, Amanda, Bottrell, Cathy, Lawlor, Christopher +1 more·2022·Pediatric Blood & Cancer

Abstract

Background: The Electronic Surviving Cancer Competently Intervention Program (eSCCIP), a psychosocial eHealth intervention for parents and caregivers of children with cancer (parents), was delivered in a community‐based psychosocial oncology center. Primary endpoints were intervention acceptability, feasibility, and accessibility, with a secondary exploratory focus on psychosocial outcomes. Procedure: Oncology therapists in a psychosocial oncology center were trained in eSCCIP delivery. Participants were eligible for participation if they were the primary caregiver of a child with cancer between the ages 0 and 17, could read and write in English, and had reliable internet access to complete eSCCIP. Surveys were administered electronically at baseline and post intervention to evaluate study endpoints. Effect sizes (Cohen's d ) were computed for exploratory psychosocial outcomes. Nineteen parents completed the intervention. Results: Parents rated eSCCIP as highly acceptable, feasible, and accessible. A large clinical effect was detected for acute distress ( d = 0.79). Moderate clinical effects were reported for overall posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) symptoms ( d = 0.37), negative mood/cognitions ( d = 0.59), and symptoms of anxiety ( d = 0.48). Conclusions: Results indicate that eSCCIP is an acceptable, feasible, and accessible psychosocial intervention for parents. Exploratory analyses suggest that participation in eSCCIP may contribute to decreases in acute distress, symptoms of anxiety, and symptoms of PTSD.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/pbc.29352

Cites

45 of 45 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Canter, K. S., McIntyre, R., Babb, R., Ramirez, A. P., Vega, G., Lewis, A., Bottrell, C., Lawlor, C., & Kazak, A. E.
Affiliations
  • Thomas Jefferson University (US)
  • Inova Schar Cancer Institute Life with Cancer Fairfax Virginia USA
  • Inova Fairfax Hospital (US)
  • Nemours Center for Healthcare Delivery Science Wilmington Delaware USA
  • Children's National (US)
Venue
Pediatric Blood & Cancer
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2021-09-17
Volume
69
Issue
1
Pages
e29352-e29352
ISSN
  • 1545-5009 (ISSN-L)
  • 1545-5017
OpenAlex
W3199038173
Cited by
35
References
45
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 12 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 2
FWCI
5.44
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Pediatric Blood & Cancer (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health › Childhood Cancer Survivors' Quality of Life
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Digital Mental Health Interventions
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Cancer survivorship and care
Keywords
parents of children with cancer, childhood cancer, caregiver distress, post-traumatic stress disorder, anxiety, negative mood, treatment acceptability, feasibility, psycho-oncology, community-based intervention
MeSH terms
Psychosocial Intervention, Adolescent, Child, Child, Preschool, Humans, Infant, Infant, Newborn, Neoplasms, Parents, Caregivers, Telemedicine

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