Couples' support-related communication, psychological distress, and relationship satisfaction among women with early stage breast cancer
Abstract
This study examined associations between couple communication about cancer and psychological distress and relationship satisfaction of women diagnosed with early stage breast cancer. One hundred forty-eight couples completed a videotaped discussion of a cancer-related issue and a general issue. Patients completed measures of psychological distress and relationship satisfaction. Videotapes were coded with the Rapid Marital Interaction Coding System. Analyses focused on partner responses to patient self-disclosures. During cancer-issue discussions, patients reported less distress when partners responded to disclosures with reciprocal self-disclosure and humor and when partners were less likely to propose solutions. Fewer links between partner responses to patient self-disclosures and distress were found in general-issue discussions. Results suggest partner responses play a role in women's adaptation to breast cancer.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
For some couples, the cancer experience can bring them closer together, but for others-presumably those without healthy means of coping or communicating prior to diagnosis-the prostate cancer experience can act as a significant relational stressor.
“For some couples, the cancer experience can bring them closer together, but for others—presumably, those who do not have healthy means of coping/communicating prior to diagnosis—the PC experience can act as a significant relational stressor.66,67”
From Preliminary Development of a Mindfulness-Based Group Therapy to Expand Couples’ Sexual Intimacy after Prostate Cancer: A Mixed Methods Approach (2021) · cites this paper as [67]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 62 · Cited by 220
- Authors
- Manne, S., Sherman, M., Ross, S., Ostroff, J., Heyman, R. E., & Fox, K.
- Affiliations
- Fox Chase Cancer Center (US)
- University of Missouri–Kansas City (US)
- Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center (US)
- Stony Brook University (US)
- Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania (US)
- Venue
- Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology
- Published
- 2004
- Volume
- 72
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 660-670
- ISSN
- 0022-006X (ISSN-L)
- 1939-2117
- OpenAlex
- W2010895750
- Cited by
- 220
- References
- 62
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 11 · 2018: 15 · 2017: 14 · 2016: 10 · 2015: 10 · 2014: 14 · 2013: 14 · 2012: 10
- FWCI
- 10.64
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- National Cancer Institute (R01 CA78084, R01CA078084)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Attachment and Relationship Dynamics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Cancer survivorship and care
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Patient-Provider Communication in Healthcare
- Keywords
- early breast cancer, couples, couple communication, psychological distress, relationship satisfaction, self-disclosure, partner responses, humor, marital interaction
- MeSH terms
- Adult, Breast Neoplasms, Communication, Depression, Family Characteristics, Female, Humans, Interpersonal Relations, Middle Aged, Neoplasm Staging, Personal Satisfaction, Surveys and Questionnaires, Social Support, Videotape Recording
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
