Cited by 30Cancer survivorship and careDigital Mental Health InterventionsHealth Literacy and Information Accessibility

Internet-based interventions for cancer-related distress: exploring the experiences of those whose needs are not met

Open access
Gorlick, Amanda, Bantum, Erin O'Carroll, Owen, Jason E.·2014·Psycho-Oncology

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Low levels of engagement in Internet-based interventions are common. Understanding users' experiences with these interventions is a key to improving efficacy. Although qualitative methods are well-suited for this purpose, few qualitative studies have been conducted in this area. In the present study, we assessed experiences with an Internet-based intervention among cancer survivors who made minimal use of the intervention. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 25 cancer survivors who were minimally engaged (i.e., spent around 1 h total on website) with the online intervention, health-space.net. The intervention was a 12-week, facilitated support group with social and informational components. Interviews were analyzed using an interpretive descriptive design. RESULTS: Three broad categories, consisting of 18 specific themes, were identified from the interviews, which included connecting with similar others, individual expectations, and problems with the site (Κ = 0.88). The 'similar others' category reflected the significance of interacting with relatable survivors (i.e., same cancer type), the 'individual expectations' category reflected the significance of participants' expectations about using online interventions (i.e., personally relevant information), and the 'problems with the site' category reflected the significance of study procedures (i.e., website structure). CONCLUSIONS: The data indicate that minimally engaged participants have high variability regarding their needs and preferences for Internet-based interventions. Using qualitative methodologies to identify and incorporate these needs into the next generation of interventions has the potential to increase engagement and outcomes. The current study provides a foundation for future research to characterize survivors' needs and offer suggestions for better meeting these needs.

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/pon.3443

Cites

19 of 19 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

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?

  • Some studies have described advantages of online psychosocial interventions, such as compensating for geographical barriers and saving travel time.

    “Some studies have described the advantages of online psychosocial interventions (55), such as compensating for geographical barriers and saving travel time (56).”

    From Spanish Adaptation of Meaning-Centered Psychotherapy for Participants With Cancer: Study Protocol of a Randomized Control Trial (2022) · cites this paper as [56]

    The Introduction (page unavailable) says online interventions can reduce barriers to psychosocial care by making participation convenient. It does not specifically discuss geographical barriers or travel-time savings, the advantages attached to this citation. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

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

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

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Gorlick, A., Bantum, E. O., & Owen, J. E.
Affiliations
  • Loma Linda University (US)
  • University of Hawaiʻi at Mānoa (US)
Corresponding author
Gorlick, Amanda
Venue
Psycho-Oncology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2013-11-17
Volume
23
Issue
4
Pages
452-458
ISSN
  • 1057-9249 (ISSN-L)
  • 1099-1611
OpenAlex
W1491674786
Cited by
30
References
19
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 1
FWCI
1.96
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Psycho-Oncology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health
  • National Cancer Institute (R03CA137391)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Cancer survivorship and care
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Digital Mental Health Interventions
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Literacy and Information Accessibility
Keywords
online intervention, cancer-related distress, cancer survivors, user engagement, user experience, online support groups, needs assessment, website usability, social support
MeSH terms
Adult, Aged, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Neoplasms, Patient Education as Topic, Self-Help Groups, Social Support, Stress, Psychological, Needs Assessment, Internet, Qualitative Research

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