CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 8Cancer survivorship and carePalliative and Oncologic CarePalliative Care and End-of-Life Issues

Impact of a nurse-led and a web-based psychoeducational program for advanced cancer patients and their caregivers: Results of a three-arm randomized controlled trial

Open access
De Vleminck, Aline, Matthys, Orphé, Turola, Elena, Dierickx, Sigrid, Dombrecht, Laure, Van Goethem, Vincent, Deliens, Luc, Lapeire, Lore +11 more·2025·International Journal of Nursing Studies
DOI 10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2025.105192
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

BACKGROUND Advanced cancer impacts the lives of both patients and their family caregivers. They often experience substantial declines in quality of life and physical, emotional, and spiritual distress that generate significant unmet psychosocial care needs. These effects are interrelated. Dyadic psychoeducational interventions, helping dyads to manage the impact of the disease and maintain their quality of life, demonstrate benefits by concurrently addressing challenges for oncology patients and family caregivers. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of a face-to-face nurse-led and a web-based psychoeducational intervention for patients with advanced cancer and their family caregivers on primary (emotional function and self-efficacy) and secondary endpoints. METHODS This international multicenter three-arm parallel-group superiority randomized controlled trial was conducted in 6 European countries (Belgium, Denmark, Italy, Netherlands, Ireland and UK). Between February 2021 and August 2023, dyads formed by patients with advanced solid cancer and their primary family caregiver were randomly assigned without blinding to a face-to-face psychoeducational intervention, a web-based psychoeducational intervention, or standard care. The two primary endpoints were 1) emotional functioning (10-item European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer short form), and 2) self-efficacy (Cancer Self-efficacy Scale) for patients with advanced cancer and their family caregivers at 12 weeks. Secondary outcomes included quality of life, benefits of illness appraisal, coping, and dyad communication at 12 weeks and 24 weeks. RESULTS In total, 431 dyads were randomized to the face-to-face group (n=140), the web-based group (n=148) or standard care (n=143). Neither the face-to-face group nor the web-based group showed significant improvements compared to control group in emotional functioning for patients (-0.27; 95%CI -2.11 to 0.76 and.12; 95 % CI -1.65 to 1.89) or caregivers (30; 95 % CI -1·41 to 2·00 and 0.17; 95 % CI -1.45 to 1.79); a significant improvement of patients' self-efficacy (9.02; 95 % CI 2.45 to 15.58) in the face-to-face group was found. Further analysis indicated a positive effect at 12 weeks for the face-to-face group on patients' dyadic coping and ways of giving support, and on caregivers' problem-focused coping. There were no significant effects for the web-based group. CONCLUSION Our trial showed neutral findings for emotional function in both a face-to-face nurse-led and a web-based psychoeducational dyadic support program. Positive findings were found for patients' self-efficacy and several secondary outcomes in patients and caregivers for the face-to-face program. Why the face-to-face but not the web-based program led to positive findings for several outcomes needs further evaluation. TRIAL REGISTRATION Clinicaltrial.gov (NCT04626349). The trial is now closed.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2025.105192

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

The text we found for this paper looks like another document, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Self-check

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

The text we found for this paper looks like another document, so the self-check wasn’t run.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

7 of the 44 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. van der Wel, 2022, Systematic translation and adaptation of the FOCUS program [...] for use in six European countries, Support. Care Cancer [Internet], 30, 9763

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
De Vleminck, A., Matthys, O., Turola, E., Dierickx, S., Dombrecht, L., Van Goethem, V., Deliens, L., Lapeire, L., Hudson, P., Eecloo, K., Brazil, K., Groenvold, M., Di Leo, S., van der Heide, A., Normand, C., Harding, R., Pilch, M., Northouse, L., & Cohen, J.
Affiliations
  • Vrije Universiteit Brussel (BE)
  • Azienda Sanitaria Unità Locale di Reggio Emilia (IT)
  • Ghent University Hospital (BE)
  • Queen's University Belfast (GB)
  • King's College London (GB)
  • University College Dublin (IE)
  • University of Michigan (US)
ORCID
Venue
International Journal of Nursing Studies
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2025-11
Volume
171
Pages
105192
ISSN
0020-7489 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2025.105192
OpenAlex
W4413325500
Semantic Scholar
b4f3cb35c700a34e5b0d0618d35c86938806b057
Cited by
8
References
44
Citations by year
2026: 8
FWCI
2.97
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • International Journal of Nursing Studies (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Research Portal (King's College London) (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • EUR Research Repository (Erasmus University Rotterdam) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • Research Portal (Queen's University Belfast) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • VUBIR (Vrije Universiteit Brussel) (submittedVersion)
  • Ghent University Academic Bibliography (Ghent University) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Research at the University of Copenhagen (University of Copenhagen) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Horizon 2020 Framework Programme (825722)
  • Bijzonder Onderzoeksfonds UGent (BOF23/CDV/010)
  • Universiteit Gent
  • Public Health Agency
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Cancer survivorship and care
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Palliative and Oncologic Care
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Palliative Care and End-of-Life Issues
Keywords
advanced cancer, family caregivers, nurse-led intervention, online intervention, emotional functioning, self-efficacy, quality of life, coping, illness appraisal, dyadic communication, psychosocial care, solid tumors
MeSH terms
Adult, Aged, Europe, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Neoplasms, Patient Education as Topic, Quality of Life, Caregivers, 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.

Classified by jev-1.13-20260917 (gold-guideline-v0.2) on 2026-10-14.

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