CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 143Healthcare Education and Workforce IssuesPalliative and Oncologic CareCancer survivorship and care

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 42 of the 42 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The effects of a 24-h psychological training program on attitudes, communication skills and occupational stress in oncology: a randomised study

Razavi, Darius, Delvaux, Nicole, Marchal, Serge, Bredart, Anne, Farvacques, Christine, Paesmans, Marianne·1993·European Journal of Cancer
DOI 10.1016/0959-8049(93)90538-q
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

The usefulness of psychological training programs (P.T.P.) in health care settings devoted to cancer care is beginning to be recognised but their content, form and effectiveness need further investigation. Seventy-two oncology nurses were randomly assigned to a 24-h P.T.P. or to a waiting list period. Attitudes were assessed by a semantic differential questionnaire, occupational stress was assessed by the Nursing Stress Scale and communication skills were assessed by standardised videotaped role-playing exercises. These were used to compare trained (T.S.) and control subjects (C.S.). The results show a significant training effect on attitudes (P = 0.05), especially on those related to self concept (P = 0.004), and on the level of occupational stress related to inadequate preparation (P = 0.02). Limited changes were found regarding post-training communication skills. T.S. were significantly more in control of the interview than C.S. (P = 0.02). The results indicate that 24-h P.T.P. assessed here are effective. The data also demonstrate the need to consolidate the skills acquired by regular post-training sessions.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/0959-8049(93)90538-q

Cites

42 of 42 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

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?

Citations

Cites

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Ziegler, 1984, 59, 205
  2. Brown, 1981, The effects of a death education program for nurses working in a long-term hosptial, Dissert Abstr Int, 42, 54

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 143

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Razavi, D., Delvaux, N., Marchal, S., Bredart, A., Farvacques, C., & Paesmans, M.
Affiliations
  • Université Libre de Bruxelles (BE)
  • Institut Jules Bordet (BE)
Corresponding author
Razavi, Darius
ORCID
Venue
European Journal of Cancer
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
1993-01
Volume
29
Issue
13
Pages
1858-1863
ISSN
0959-8049 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/0959-8049(93)90538-q
OpenAlex
W2099444793
Cited by
143
References
42
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2023: 3 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 6 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 13 · 2013: 10 · 2012: 7
FWCI
17.24
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
www.elsevier.com/tdm/userlicense/1.0/ (tdm)
Locations
  • European Journal of Cancer (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Dépôt institutionnel de l'Université libre de Bruxelles (Université Libre de Bruxelles) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Nursing › Leadership and Management › Healthcare Education and Workforce Issues
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Palliative and Oncologic Care
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Cancer survivorship and care
Keywords
psychology training programs, oncology nurses, occupational stress, communication skills, nursing attitudes, self-concept, cancer care, role play, Nursing Stress Scale, semantic differential
MeSH terms
Adult, Attitude of Health Personnel, Communication, Education, Nursing, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Occupational Diseases, Oncology Nursing, Psychology, Applied, Self Concept, Semantic Differential, Stress, Psychological, Time Factors

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