Cited by 44Childhood Cancer Survivors' Quality of LifeFamily Support in IllnessResilience and Mental Health

Psychological interventions for enhancing resilience in parents of children with cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Luo, Yuan-hui, Xia, Wei, He, Xiang-ling, Zhang, Jing-ping, Li, Ho Cheung William·2021·Supportive Care in Cancer

Abstract

Purpose Caring for children with cancer is considerably stressful for parents and may negatively affect their physical and psychological well-being. Resilience plays a pivotal role in maintaining psychological well-being in the face of stress and adversity. The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the effectiveness of psychological interventions in promoting resilience among parents of children with cancer.Methods Five English databases and two Chinese databases were subjected to a systematic search from inception to March 2020. The methodological quality of the included randomised controlled trials was evaluated using the Cochrane risk of bias tool (RoB 2.0). Meta-analyses and descriptive analyses were used. Subgroup analyses of the intervention modes and time since diagnosis were also conducted.Results Five studies involving 308 participants were included. The systematic review identified three types of psychological intervention, namely resilience training, self-disclosure and peer support, which had different essential components and characteristics. The meta-analyses of three randomised controlled trials revealed that the psychological interventions enhanced parents' resilience with a large effect size (Hedges' adjusted g 0.92; 95% CI 0.22, 1.62; p = .01).Conclusion Evidence supports the effectiveness of psychological interventions for enhancing resilience in the parents of children with cancer. Healthcare professionals can incorporate evidence-based psychological interventions to enhance resilience to help these parents better navigate adversity, adapt to their children's situations and improve their psychological well-being.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s00520-021-06344-0

Cites

37 of 37 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
Luo, Y.-H., Xia, W., He, X.-L., Zhang, J.-P., & Li, H. C. W.
Affiliations
Sun Yat-sen University (CN)
Venue
Supportive Care in Cancer
Published
2021-06-15
Volume
29
Issue
11
Pages
7101-7110
ISSN
  • 0941-4355 (ISSN-L)
  • 1433-7339
OpenAlex
W3169727307
Cited by
44
References
37
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 13 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 2
FWCI
1.64
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Supportive Care in Cancer (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health › Childhood Cancer Survivors' Quality of Life
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Family Support in Illness
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Resilience and Mental Health
Keywords
parental resilience, childhood cancer, psychological intervention, resilience training, self-disclosure, peer support, parental psychological well-being, caregiver stress
MeSH terms
Psychosocial Intervention, Child, Humans, Neoplasms, Parents

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