Cited by 36Cancer survivorship and careWomen's cancer prevention and managementGrief, Bereavement, and Mental Health

Mediators of a coping and communication-enhancing intervention and a supportive counseling intervention among women diagnosed with gynecological cancers.

Open access
Manne, Sharon L., Winkel, Gary, Rubin, Stephen, Edelson, Mitchell, Rosenblum, Norman, Bergman, Cynthia, Hernandez, Enrique, Carlson, John +1 more·2008·Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology

Abstract

The authors evaluated mechanisms of change for a coping and communication-enhancing intervention (CCI) and supportive counseling (SC). They proposed that the effects of CCI on depressive symptoms would be mediated by psychological processes targeted by CCI, namely increases in the following: positive reappraisal, acceptance, planful problem solving, attempts to understand emotional reactions to cancer, emotional expression, seeking of emotional and instrumental support, and self-esteem. The authors hypothesized that the effects of SC on depressive symptoms would be mediated by the processes encouraged by SC, in this case increases in the following: expression of emotions, attempts to understand emotional reactions to cancer, and self-esteem. Three hundred fifty-three women were randomized to a CCI, SC, or usual care control group and completed measures at preintervention and 3, 6, and 9 months later. The effects of CCI were fully mediated by positive reappraisal, problem solving, and self-esteem and partially mediated by emotional expression. The effects of SC were partially mediated by positive reappraisal. These findings provide support for hypothesized mediators for CCI. The authors were less able to identify mediators for SC. Future research might benefit from identifying SC mediators.

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 · 10.1037/a0014071

Cites

46 of 47 references verified1 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?

  • Particularly well-supported change processes from newer forms of CBT include cognitive defusion and non-reactivity.

    “Particularly well-supported change processes from newer forms of CBT include cognitive defusion 74 (which is the ability to experience thoughts with a sense of distance from them, so as to diminish their automatic behavioral impact) and non-reactivity 75,76 (which is allowing cognitive or other experiences to come and go without reacting in an effort to change them).”

    From “Third-wave” cognitive and behavioral therapies and the emergence of a process-based approach to intervention in psychiatry (2021) · cites this paper as [76]

    The Methods section measures acceptance of cancer-related events, not non-reactivity to thoughts or other experiences. The Discussion reports that acceptance did not mediate the intervention’s effects; neither that section nor the passages retrieved for non-reactivity and related terms address whether non-reactivity is a well-supported change process. (LLM, conf=0.75)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

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: 2

  1. Novalis P Rojcewicz S Peele R Clinical Manual of Supportive Therapy 1993 Washington, DC American Psychiatric Assoc. Press
  2. Singer JD Willett JB Applied longitudinal data analysis 2003 New York Oxford University Press

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Manne, S. L., Winkel, G., Rubin, S., Edelson, M., Rosenblum, N., Bergman, C., Hernandez, E., Carlson, J., & Rocereto, T.
Affiliations
  • Fox Chase Cancer Center (US)
  • City University of New York (US)
  • University of Pennsylvania (US)
  • Thomas Jefferson University (US)
  • Drexel University (US)
Venue
Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology
Published
2008
Volume
76
Issue
6
Pages
1034-1045
ISSN
  • 0022-006X (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-2117
OpenAlex
W2066547945
Cited by
36
References
46
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 2 · 2021: 2 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 5 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 5
FWCI
1.23
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
National Cancer Institute (CA85066; CA006927)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Cancer survivorship and care
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Women's cancer prevention and management
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Grief, Bereavement, and Mental Health
Keywords
gynecologic cancer, women with cancer, coping interventions, supportive counseling, depressive symptoms, mechanisms of change, mediation analysis, positive reappraisal, problem solving, self-esteem, emotional expression, social support seeking
MeSH terms
Adaptation, Psychological, Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Communication, Counseling, Depression, Female, Genital Neoplasms, Female, Humans, Middle Aged, Problem Solving, Surveys and Questionnaires, Speech Therapy, Models, Statistical, Young Adult

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