CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 233Cancer survivorship and careWomen's cancer prevention and managementHealth disparities and outcomes

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 46 of the 46 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Social networks, social support mechanisms, and quality of life after breast cancer diagnosis

Open access
Kroenke, Candyce H., Kwan, Marilyn L., Neugut, Alfred I., Ergas, Isaac J., Wright, Jaime D., Caan, Bette J., Hershman, Dawn, Kushi, Lawrence H.·2013·Breast Cancer Research and Treatment
DOI 10.1007/s10549-013-2477-2PMC PMC3906043
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

We examined mechanisms through which social relationships influence quality of life (QOL) in breast cancer survivors. This study included 3,139 women from the Pathways Study who were diagnosed with breast cancer from 2006 to 2011 and provided data on social networks (the presence of a spouse or intimate partner, religious/social ties, volunteering, and numbers of close friends and relatives), social support (tangible support, emotional/informational support, affection, positive social interaction), and QOL, measured by the FACT-B, approximately 2 months post diagnosis. We used logistic models to evaluate associations between social network size, social support, and lower versus higher than median QOL scores. We further stratified by stage at diagnosis and treatment. In multivariate-adjusted analyses, women who were characterized as socially isolated had significantly lower FACT-B (OR = 2.18, 95 % CI: 1.72-2.77), physical well-being (WB) (OR = 1.61, 95 % CI: 1.27-2.03), functional WB (OR = 2.08, 95 % CI: 1.65-2.63), social WB (OR = 3.46, 95 % CI: 2.73-4.39), and emotional WB (OR = 1.67, 95 % CI: 1.33-2.11) scores and higher breast cancer symptoms (OR = 1.48, 95 % CI: 1.18-1.87) compared with socially integrated women. Each social network member independently predicted higher QOL. Simultaneous adjustment for social networks and social support partially attenuated associations between social networks and QOL. The strongest mediator and type of social support that was most predictive of QOL outcomes was "positive social interaction." However, each type of support was important depending on outcome, stage, and treatment status. Larger social networks and greater social support were related to higher QOL after a diagnosis of breast cancer. Effective social support interventions need to evolve beyond social-emotional interventions and need to account for disease severity and treatment status.

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 · 10.1007/s10549-013-2477-2

Cites

46 of 46 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

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?

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

Flagged first, then by citations

Show all 46 references

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 101–200 of 233

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Kroenke, C. H., Kwan, M. L., Neugut, A. I., Ergas, I. J., Wright, J. D., Caan, B. J., Hershman, D., & Kushi, L. H.
Affiliations
  • Kaiser Permanente (US)
  • Columbia University (US)
  • Graduate Theological Union (US)
Corresponding author
Kroenke, Candyce H.
ORCID
Venue
Breast Cancer Research and Treatment
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2013-05-09
Volume
139
Issue
2
Pages
515-527
ISSN
  • 0167-6806 (ISSN-L)
  • 1573-7217
DOI
10.1007/s10549-013-2477-2
PMC
PMC3906043
OpenAlex
W2038597076
Cited by
233
References
46
Citations by year
2026: 17 · 2025: 20 · 2024: 14 · 2023: 13 · 2022: 22 · 2021: 24 · 2020: 25 · 2019: 17 · 2018: 23 · 2017: 15 · 2016: 17 · 2015: 15 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 4
FWCI
7.50
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
www.springer.com/tdm (tdm)
Locations
  • Breast Cancer Research and Treatment (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health
  • National Cancer Institute (R01CA105274)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Cancer survivorship and care
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Women's cancer prevention and management
  • Social Sciences › Health › Health disparities and outcomes
Keywords
breast cancer survivors, quality of life, social networks, social support, social isolation, social integration, positive social interaction, emotional support, tangible support, breast cancer symptoms, stage at diagnosis, treatment status, Pathways Study
MeSH terms
Adult, Aged, Breast Neoplasms, Female, Humans, Middle Aged, Prognosis, Quality of Life, Social Support, Social Networking

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