Cited by 80Cancer survivorship and careDigital Mental Health InterventionsMindfulness and Compassion Interventions

An online stress management workbook for breast cancer

Open access
Carpenter, Kelly M., Stoner, Susan A., Schmitz, KrisAnn, McGregor, Bonnie A., Doorenbos, Ardith Z.·2014·Journal of Behavioral Medicine

Abstract

Cognitive behavioral stress management groups have been shown to be decrease psychological symptoms and increase adaptive coping in breast cancer patients, but dissemination of this effective intervention has been challenging. The goal of the present project was to develop an online cognitive behavioral stress management intervention for early stage breast cancer survivors and evaluate its effectiveness using a 2 group × 3 time randomized, waitlist-controlled design. Intervention and waitlist control group participants were assessed at three time points: at baseline; at 10 weeks, after which only intervention participants had used the workbook; and at 20 weeks, after which both groups had used the workbook. Results indicate that at 10 weeks intervention participants showed improved self-efficacy for coping with their cancer and for regulating negative mood and lower levels of cancer-related post-traumatic symptoms as compared to the control group, suggesting that an internet stress management intervention could be effective for helping breast cancer patients increase their confidence in their ability to cope with stress.

AI snapshot

Written from the paper’s full text.

TL;DR

This randomized waitlist-controlled trial evaluated an online Coping with Cancer Workbook adapted from cognitive behavioral stress management for breast cancer survivors. Immediate access improved self-efficacy for coping with cancer and negative mood at week 10 and reduced cancer-related post-traumatic symptoms relative to waitlist, with high satisfaction but no effects on benefit finding, social/functional well-being, or positive affect.

Key findings

  • Primary outcomes showed a multivariate condition effect, F(3, 98) = 3.04, p = .033, η² = .085; univariate effects were significant for self-efficacy for coping with cancer, F(1, 100) = 5.67, p = .019, η² = .054, and self-efficacy for coping with negative mood, F(1, 100) = 7.58, p = .007, η² = .070, with intervention scores higher than control after controlling for baseline.
  • Secondary outcomes showed a condition × time interaction, F(4, 98) = 2.77, p = .031, η² = .102, significant for cancer-related post-traumatic symptoms, F(1, 108) = 9.66, p = .002, η² = .088; symptoms decreased at week 10 in the intervention group but not control, and by week 20 the control group showed comparable reduction. No significant effects were found for benefit finding, social well-being, functional well-being, or positive affect.
  • Satisfaction was high: overall impression mean 4.3 (SD = 0.8), “good tool” mean 4.4 (SD = 0.8), and “recommend to a friend” mean 4.4 (SD = 0.8). Usage data showed 29% completed all 10 chapters, participants visited an average 159.8 pages (SD = 93.1) of 195 unique pages (82%), and signed on an average of 13.3 days (SD = 8.8).
  • Retention: 115 (87%) completed week 10, 116 (88%) completed week 20, and 111 (84%) completed baseline, week 10, and week 20. Intervention participants were more likely than control participants to miss the week 10 assessment, χ²(1) = 9.32, p = .002, and week 20 assessment, χ²(1) = 8.33, p = .004.

Methods

  • Randomized waitlist-controlled trial using a 2 group × 3 time design (baseline, week 10, week 20). Of 210 screened, 132 women were randomized; eligible participants were English-speaking adult women within 18 months of Stage 0, I, II, or III breast cancer diagnosis, reporting at least moderate distress, with phone and internet access. Mean age was 50.9 years (SD = 9.9; range 25–73); 19% endorsed racial/ethnic minority status, 94% had breast cancer-related surgery, 45% chemotherapy, 49% radiation, and 20% were currently undergoing chemotherapy or radiation.
  • The intervention was an online Coping with Cancer Workbook modeled on an in-person CBSM intervention, consisting of an introduction and 10 chapters with didactic instruction, interactive exercises, relaxation/guided imagery/meditation, guided expressive writing, weekly homework, video/audio elements, and an asynchronous discussion board. Participants were encouraged to complete one chapter per week; waitlist controls received access after the week 10 assessment. All participants received biweekly phone calls, and email reminders were sent at the start of each workbook week.
  • Analysis used MANCOVA controlling for baseline scores and baseline-related covariates, with condition as between-subjects factor and time as within-subjects factor. All randomized participants were invited and included without regard to intervention participation; no imputation was used due to relatively low missing data. Primary outcomes were Cancer Behavior Inventory, Negative Mood Regulation Scale, and Benefit Finding Scale; secondary outcomes included Revised Impact of Event Scale, FACT-B social and functional well-being subscales, and PANAS positive affect.

Limitations

  • Stated in the paper: the study lacked an active control condition; relaxation exercise practice amount and duration were not tracked; and most participants came from the Love/Avon Army of Women registry and were eager to participate in research, potentially limiting generalizability to the broader community of breast cancer survivors.
  • Evident from the text: attrition was differential by condition, with intervention participants more likely to drop out, and no imputation was used; the authors note it is possible that women who did not find the workbook helpful were the ones who dropped out, making results difficult to interpret. The moderated discussion board was not frequently used, and actual enactment of coping skills was not measured.

Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s10865-012-9481-6

Cites

61 of 61 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

0 of 40 cited sources checked · 0 supported · 0 flagged

  • Findingown data

    Mean rating of whether one would recommend the workbook to a friend with breast cancer was 4.4 (SD = 0.8) on a 5-point scale where 5 indicated strongly agree.

    “4.4 (SD = 0.8) on the item assessing whether one would recommend the workbook to a friend with breast cancer (5 indicated strongly agree)”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Findingown data

    The conditions differed significantly in level of post-traumatic symptoms at week 10 (p < .05).

    “Post hoc pairwise comparisons indicated that the conditions differed significantly in level of post-traumatic symptoms at week 10 (p < .05) but not at week 20.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Findingown data

    The intervention did not increase positive affect.

    “the intervention did not increase positive affect”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Findingown data

    Mean overall impression of the workbook was 4.3 (SD = 0.8) on a 5-point scale where 5 indicated 'wonderful'.

    “4.3 (SD = 0.8) on the overall impression item (5 indicated “wonderful”)”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Findingnone given

    The moderated discussion board was not frequently used.

    “it was not frequently used”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims. 29
  • The quote only partly states this claim. 1
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. 29
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data
    § An Online Stress Management Workbook for Breast Cancer

    Our literature search revealed only two CBT-based online interventions for cancer patients, one by Owen et al. (2005) and one by Beatty et al. (2011), both providing structured CBT for distressed cancer patients.

    “Our literature search revealed only two CBT-based online interventions for cancer patients, one developed by Owen and colleagues (2005) and the other by Beatty and colleagues (2011), both providing structured CBT for distressed cancer patients.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Owen et al., 2005 source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Beatty et al., 2011

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Among secondary outcomes, there was a significant condition by time interaction for cancer-related post-traumatic symptoms, which decreased at week 10 in the intervention group but not in the control group.

    “there was a significant condition by time interaction for cancer-related post-traumatic symptoms, which decreased at week 10 in the intervention group but not in the control group”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    No significant differences were found in regard to either social or functional well-being.

    “No significant differences were found in regard to either social or functional well-being”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Inspection of the 95% confidence intervals for both measures of self-efficacy showed they did not overlap at week 10 but did overlap at week 20.

    “support for this hypothesis was found in inspection of the 95% confidence intervals for both measures of self-efficacy, which did not overlap at week 10 but did overlap at week 20”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Unlike the in-person CBSM group intervention, the online adaptation did not appear to affect finding benefit in the cancer experience, for which no significant effects or interactions were found.

    “unlike the in-person CBSM group intervention, the online adaptation did not appear to affect finding benefit in the cancer experience, for which we found no significant effects or interactions.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • The quote only partly states this claim.

    Findingown data

    MANCOVA revealed a multivariate main effect for condition on primary outcomes (self-efficacy for coping with cancer and negative mood), F(3, 98) = 3.04, p = .033, η2 = .085.

    “MANCOVA revealed a multivariate main effect for condition, F(3, 98) = 3.04, p = .033, η2 = .085.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    One hundred thirty-two women completed baseline measures and were randomized.

    “One hundred thirty-two women completed baseline measures and were randomized.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingown data

    No acute exacerbations of distress were encountered during the biweekly phone calls.

    “Acute exacerbations of distress would have prompted further intervention; however, none were encountered.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    The condition by time interaction was not significant for any of the other secondary outcomes, and there were no other significant effects.

    “The interaction was not significant for any of the other secondary outcomes, and there were no other significant effects.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Use of the workbook was not significantly different between intervention and control women even though the intervention women were contacted by phone five times during the 10 week intervention period and asked about their workbook use.

    “use of the workbook was not significantly different between intervention and control women even though the intervention women were contacted by phone five times during the 10 week intervention period and asked about their workbook use.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingnone given

    Most of our sample came from the Love/Avon Army of Women research registry and was comprised of women eager to participate in research that might help other women with breast cancer.

    “most of our sample came from the Love/Avon Army of Women research registry and was comprised of women eager to participate in research that might help other women with breast cancer.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation
    § An Online Stress Management Workbook for Breast Cancer

    Most women diagnosed with breast cancer experience heightened distress.

    “Most women diagnosed with breast cancer experience heightened distress (e.g., Boehmke & Brown, 2005)”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Boehmke & Brown, 2005 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductnone given

    All procedures were approved by a human subjects review board, including a waiver of written consent.

    “All procedures were approved by a human subjects review board, including a waiver of written consent.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation
    § An Online Stress Management Workbook for Breast Cancer

    Dissemination of empirically-validated psychological interventions for cancer patients is challenging, and many patients who could benefit do not receive it.

    “Despite substantial evidence for the effectiveness of psychological interventions in reducing distress among cancer patients, dissemination of empirically-validated interventions is challenging, and many patients who could benefit from this intervention do not receive it (Ellis et al., 2005; Jacobsen, 2009; Kerner et al., 2005; Stanton, 2006).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
    • cites Ellis et al., 2005 source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Jacobsen, 2009 source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Kerner et al., 2005 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation
    § An Online Stress Management Workbook for Breast Cancer

    Interventions that include coping skills and stress management training increase coping self-efficacy, which can empower patients to face the future with less anxiety.

    “Such interventions not only help patients learn new skills to cope with their current stressors, but also serve to increase coping self-efficacy (i.e., confidence in the ability to cope with cancer), which can empower patients to face the future with less anxiety (Bandura, 1991).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Bandura, 1991 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation
    § An Online Stress Management Workbook for Breast Cancer

    The gap in dissemination and implementation of empirically supported interventions is due to lack of therapists trained in delivering psychosocial interventions and because most interventions are delivered in urban clinic- and university-based settings using in-person groups, which can be difficult to access and fit into survivors' schedules.

    “This gap in the dissemination and implementation of empirically supported interventions is due not only to a lack of therapists trained in delivering psychosocial interventions, but also to the fact that most interventions are delivered in urban clinic- and university-based settings using in-person groups, which can be difficult to access and fit into survivors’ schedules (Institute of Medicine, 2”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Institute of Medicine, 2008

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation
    § An Online Stress Management Workbook for Breast Cancer

    Interventions that include coping skills and stress management training for cancer patients increase positive coping and decrease symptoms.

    “interventions that include coping skills and stress management training for cancer patients have been found to increase positive coping and decrease symptoms (e.g., Andersen et al., 2004; Antoni et al., 2001; Cunningham et al., 1993; Cunningham & Tocco, 1989; Telch & Telch, 1986; Yates et al., 2005).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
    • cites Andersen et al., 2004 source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Antoni et al., 2001 source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Cunningham et al., 1993 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation
    § An Online Stress Management Workbook for Breast Cancer

    The Beatty et al. (2011) intervention was modeled on existing self-help materials and appears promising, but has only been evaluated in a small pilot study.

    “The Beatty et al (2011) intervention was modeled on existing self-help materials and appears promising, although to date it has only been evaluated in a small pilot study.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Beatty et al., 2011

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Study design and conductown data

    Participants were randomized into intervention or wait-list control according to a computerized random number table.

    “Upon completing the questionnaires, participants were randomized into the intervention or wait-list control condition according to a computerized random number table.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation
    § An Online Stress Management Workbook for Breast Cancer

    The Owen et al. (2005) study investigated an intervention not modeled on a specific empirically-validated intervention, and a small randomized trial revealed no differences between intervention and wait-list control.

    “The Owen et al study (2005) investigated an intervention that was not modeled on a specific empirically-validated intervention and a small randomized trial of the intervention revealed no differences between the intervention group and a wait-list control condition.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Owen et al., 2005 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation
    § An Online Stress Management Workbook for Breast Cancer

    According to a 2011 Pew Report, the internet is second only to physicians as a significant source of health information for 80% of online users.

    “A 2011 Pew Report states that the internet is second only to physicians as a significant source of health information for 80% of online users (Fox, 2011).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Fox, 2011

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductnone given

    Dependent variables were not assessed during the biweekly phone calls and no explicit adherence troubleshooting took place.

    “Dependent variables were not assessed during these calls and no explicit adherence troubleshooting took place.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductreasoning

    The research assistant was not blind to condition assignment because intervention participants were asked about workbook use and offered technical support.

    “Because intervention participants were also asked about their use of the workbook and offered technical support if necessary, the research assistant was not blind to condition assignment.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductreasoning

    Due to the relatively low amount of missing data and the psychosocial nature of the intervention and outcome variables, we did not impute data.

    “Due to the relatively low amount of missing data and the psychosocial nature of the intervention and outcome variables, we did not impute data.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductnone given

    All randomized participants were invited to complete outcome measures and were included in the analyses, without regard to their degree of participation in the intervention.

    “All randomized participants were invited to complete outcome measures and were included in the analyses, without regard to their degree of participation in the intervention.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data

    Cronbach's alpha for the Negative Mood Regulation Scale full scale was .902.

    “Cronbach’s alpha for the full scale was .902.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data

    In the present study, Cronbach's alpha for the Cancer Behavior Inventory v2.0 full scale was .945.

    “In the present study, Cronbach’s alpha for the full scale was .945.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data

    Cronbach's alpha for the Revised Impact of Event Scale full scale was .920.

    “Cronbach’s alpha for the full scale was .920.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data

    Participants signed on to the workbook on an average of 13.3 (SD = 8.8) days.

    “Participants signed on to the workbook on an average of 13.3 (SD = 8.8) days.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    Given the time limited nature of the study, and the fact that there were never more than 50 women in the intervention arm of the study at any one time, it is perhaps not surprising that the users did not come together to form a support community.

    “Given the time limited nature of the study, and the fact that there were never more than 50 women in the intervention arm of the study at any one time, it is perhaps not surprising that the users did not come together to form a support community.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data

    Cronbach's alpha for the Benefit Finding Scale full scale was .941.

    “Cronbach’s alpha for the full scale was .941.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data

    The week 10 assessment was completed by 115 (87%) of participants.

    “Ten weeks after completing the baseline assessment, all participants were emailed a link to the week 10 assessment which was completed by 115 (87%).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation

    Lazarus and Folkman's theory of stress, appraisal and coping states that feeling stressed results from appraising a situation as requiring more personal resources than one possesses.

    “Lazarus and Folkman’s theory of stress, appraisal and coping (Lazarus & Folkman, 1984; Folkman, 2010) states that feeling stressed results from appraising a situation as requiring more personal resources than one possesses.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Lazarus & Folkman, 1984

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Folkman, 2010 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductown data

    Number of pages and number of days did not differ between groups.

    “Independent groups t-tests indicated that number of pages and number of days did not differ between groups.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data

    Cronbach's alpha for the social well-being subscale of the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Breast was .833.

    “Cronbach’s alphas for social and functional wellbeing subscales were .833 and .839, respectively.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data

    Across conditions, 29% of participants completed all 10 chapters (defined as accessing the final page of each chapter).

    “Across conditions, 29% of participants completed all 10 chapters (defined as accessing the final page of each chapter).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data

    Cronbach's alpha for the functional well-being subscale of the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Breast was .839.

    “Cronbach’s alphas for social and functional wellbeing subscales were .833 and .839, respectively.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data

    Cronbach's alpha for the five positive affect items was .844.

    “Cronbach’s alpha for the five items was .844.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data

    The week 20 assessment was completed by 116 (88%) of participants.

    “Ten weeks after completing the week 10 assessment, all participants were emailed a link to the week 20 assessment completed by 116 (88%) of the participants.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable).

    Premisecitation

    Coping self-efficacy is a theoretically important proxy for coping.

    “coping self-efficacy is a theoretically important proxy for coping”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Lazarus & Folkman, 1984

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Folkman, 2010 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    The pattern of results suggests that the condition by time interaction did not reach significance because women in the wait-list control group did not entirely catch up to the intervention group at week 20 although they were not significantly different at that time.

    “The pattern of results apparent in the graphs suggests that the condition by time interaction did not reach significance because women in the wait-list control group did not entirely catch up to the intervention group at week 20 although they were not significantly different at that time.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Meta-analyses have shown that internet-based CBT interventions are effective overall, with effect sizes similar to those found in meta-analyses of face-to-face treatment.

    “Meta-analyses have shown that internet-based CBT interventions are effective overall, with effect sizes similar to those found in meta-analyses of face-to-face treatment (Andersson & Cuijpers, 2009; Spek et al., 2007).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Andersson & Cuijpers, 2009

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Spek et al., 2007 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data

    Participants visited an average 159.8 pages (SD = 93.1) of the 195 unique pages of the workbook (i.e., 82%).

    “Participants visited an average 159.8 pages (SD = 93.1) of the 195 unique pages of the workbook (i.e., 82%).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationown data

    The present study found a self-directed online version of an empirically-supported cognitive behavioral stress management intervention for breast cancer patients to be effective in increasing coping self-efficacy, specifically self-efficacy for coping with cancer and self-efficacy for regulating negative mood.

    “The present study found a self-directed online version of an empirically-supported cognitive behavioral stress management intervention for breast cancer patients to be effective in increasing coping self-efficacy, specifically self-efficacy for coping with cancer and self-efficacy for regulating negative mood.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductreasoning

    The development process for the Coping with Cancer Workbook was iterative and included review by content and cultural competency experts, focus groups, and usability testing with breast cancer survivors.

    “The development process was iterative and included review by content and cultural competency experts in addition to focus groups and usability testing with breast cancer survivors.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationcitation

    Women who are more confident in their coping abilities may be more likely to appraise situations as manageable, resulting in decreased stress levels and the negative physiological and affective correlates of stress.

    “Women who are more confident in their coping abilities may be more likely to appraise situations as manageable, resulting in decreased stress levels and the negative physiological and affective correlates of stress.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductnone given

    The Coping with Cancer Workbook was developed by a team of clinical psychologists and oncology social workers with expertise in CBT and the original in-person CBSM intervention, as well as experience translating face-to-face interventions into self-directed internet interventions.

    “the Coping with Cancer Workbook was developed by a team of clinical psychologists and oncology social workers with expertise in CBT interventions in general and the original in-person CBSM intervention in particular, as well as experience in translating face-to-face interventions into self-directed internet interventions.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    There are a number of existing active online communities for breast cancer survivors with memberships that number in the thousands.

    “There are a number of existing active online communities for breast cancer survivors with memberships that number in the thousands (e.g., www.youngsurvival.org).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites www.youngsurvival.org

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductreasoning

    This differential attrition rate is a weakness of the study as it is possible that women who did not find the workbook helpful were the ones who dropped out of the study, making it difficult to interpret the results.

    “This differential attrition rate is a weakness of the study as it is possible that women who did not find the workbook helpful were the ones who dropped out of the study, making it difficult to interpret the results.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductreasoning

    While we were able to use server logs to track participation in the online intervention, it is unclear how many women practiced the relaxation exercises and for how long.

    “While we were able to use server logs to track participation in the online intervention, it is unclear how many women practiced the relaxation exercises and for how long.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    The phone call protocol was instituted, in part, to keep the control women engaged in the study, and that strategy seems to have been successful.

    “We instituted the phone call protocol, in part, to keep the control women engaged in the study and that strategy seems to have been successful.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
51 of 51
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Most web sites for cancer patients are not structured interventions.

    “Although web sites exist in abundance for cancer patients, most are not structured interventions.”
1 of 1

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?

Statistics recomputed

Every reported test result, recomputed from its test statistic and degrees of freedom. A result shows as not adding up only once an independent check has confirmed it.

  • Consistentχ²(1) = 9.32reported p = .002 · recomputed p = .002

    “χ2(1) = 9.32, p = .002”

  • Consistentχ²(1) = 8.33reported p = .004 · recomputed p = .004

    “χ2(1) = 8.33, p = .004”

  • ConsistentF(3, 98) = 3.04reported p = .033 · recomputed p = .033

    “F(3, 98) = 3.04, p = .033”

  • ConsistentF(1, 100) = 5.67reported p = .019 · recomputed p = .019

    “F(1, 100) = 5.67, p = .019”

  • ConsistentF(1, 100) = 7.58reported p = .007 · recomputed p = .007

    “F(1, 100) = 7.58, p = .007”

  • ConsistentF(4, 98) = 2.77reported p = .031 · recomputed p = .031

    “F(4, 98) = 2.77, p = .031”

  • ConsistentF(1, 108) = 9.66reported p = .002 · recomputed p = .002

    “F(1, 108) = 9.66, p = .002”

7 of 7

Self-check

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

Self-check results appear here once an independent check has confirmed them.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Giese-Davis, J., Koopman, C., Butler, L. D., Classen, C., Morrow, G. R., & Spiegel, D. (1999). Self-efficacy with emotions predicts higher quality of life in primary breast cancer patients. In self-efficacy and cancer: Theory, assessment and treatment. Symposium conducted at the Annual Meeting of the Society of Behavioral Medicine, San Diego, CA.
  2. Holland, J. C. (1998). Psycho-Oncology. New York: Oxford University Press.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Carpenter, K. M., Stoner, S. A., Schmitz, K., McGregor, B. A., & Doorenbos, A. Z.
Affiliations
  • Alere (United States) (US)
  • Talaria (United States) (US)
  • Oregon Health & Science University (US)
  • Fred Hutch Cancer Center (US)
  • University of Washington (US)
Corresponding author
Carpenter, Kelly M.
Venue
Journal of Behavioral Medicine
Published
2012-12-02
Volume
37
Issue
3
Pages
458-468
ISSN
  • 0160-7715 (ISSN-L)
  • 1573-3521
OpenAlex
W2088223645
Cited by
80
References
60
Citations by year
2025: 4 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 14 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 3
FWCI
2.53
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Behavioral Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
National Cancer Institute (R43CA106154, R44CA106154)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Cancer survivorship and care
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Digital Mental Health Interventions
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Mindfulness and Compassion Interventions
Keywords
breast cancer, stress management, cognitive-behavioral intervention, online intervention, workbook, breast cancer survivors, coping self-efficacy, negative mood regulation, posttraumatic stress symptoms
MeSH terms
Adaptation, Psychological, Adult, Aged, Breast Neoplasms, Female, Humans, Manuals as Topic, Middle Aged, Stress, Psychological, Cognitive Behavioral Therapy, Treatment Outcome, Survivors, Self Efficacy, Internet

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.

Claims read by deepseek-v4.1-flash under definition version 3 (extract-v3) on 2026-10-10.

Classified by jev-1.13-20260917 (gold-guideline-v0.2) on 2026-10-10.

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