Cited by 35Cancer survivorship and careAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesCancer-related cognitive impairment studies

Metacognitive Therapy for Emotional Distress in Adult Cancer Survivors: A Case Series

Open access
Fisher, Peter L., Byrne, Angela, Salmon, Peter·2017·Cognitive Therapy and Research

Abstract

Many adult cancer survivors experience persistent emotional distress after completing cancer treatment. The aim of this study was to test the potential of a brief transdiagnostic psychological intervention-metacognitive therapy (MCT)-in reducing emotional distress in adult cancer survivors. A non-concurrent multiple baseline design with 3- and 6-months follow-up was used to evaluate the effects of MCT in four patients consecutively referred to a psycho-oncology service. Each patient received six 1-h sessions of MCT. Anxiety, depression, worry/rumination, fear of cancer recurrence and metacognitive beliefs were assessed using self-report questionnaires. MCT was associated with clinically significant reductions in anxiety, depression, fear of cancer recurrence, worry/rumination and metacognitive beliefs at the end of treatment, and gains were maintained in all patients to 3-months follow-up and in three out of four patients to 6-months follow-up. MCT is a promising brief transdiagnostic approach to psychological morbidity in adult survivors of cancer. Larger scale controlled trials are now required.

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/s10608-017-9862-9

Cites

54 of 54 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?

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

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Wells A Metacognitive for anxiety and depression 2009 New York Guildford Press

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Fisher, P. L., Byrne, A., & Salmon, P.
Affiliations
University of Liverpool (GB)
Corresponding author
Fisher, Peter L.
Venue
Cognitive Therapy and Research
Published
2017-05-29
Volume
41
Issue
6
Pages
891-901
ISSN
  • 0147-5916 (ISSN-L)
  • 1573-2819
OpenAlex
W2619470158
Cited by
35
References
54
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 1
FWCI
1.57
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Cognitive Therapy and Research (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • NORA - Norwegian Open Research Archives (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
MRC Confidence in Concept Scheme
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Cancer survivorship and care
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine › Cancer-related cognitive impairment studies
Keywords
metacognitive therapy, cancer survivors, emotional distress, anxiety, depression, rumination, worry, fear of cancer recurrence, metacognitive beliefs, psycho-oncology, transdiagnostic treatment, brief psychological intervention

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