Cited by 15Cancer survivorship and careChildhood Cancer Survivors' Quality of LifeLong-Term Effects of COVID-19

Benefit finding, posttraumatic growth and health-related quality of life in long-term cancer survivors: a prospective population-based study

Open access
Liu, Zhunzhun, Thong, Melissa S. Y., Doege, Daniela, Koch-Gallenkamp, Lena, Weisser, Linda, Bertram, Heike, Eberle, Andrea, Holleczek, Bernd +6 more·2023·Acta Oncologica

Abstract

BACKGROUND: We explored the relationship between benefit finding (BF)/posttraumatic growth (PTG) at baseline and health-related quality of life (HRQOL) at baseline and follow-up in long-term cancer survivors (LTCS; ≥5-year post-diagnosis). MATERIALS AND METHODS: HRQOL was assessed in LTCS in 2009-2011 (5- to 16-year post-diagnosis, baseline) and re-assessed in 2018/2019 (14- to 24-year post-diagnosis, follow-up). BF and PTG were measured at baseline; mean scores were dichotomized into 'none-to-low' (<3) and 'moderate-to-high' (> =3). Linear regression models and linear mixed regression models were employed to assess the association of BF/PTG with HRQOL. RESULTS: Of the 6057 baseline participants, 4373 were alive in 2019, of whom 2704 completed the follow-up questionnaire. Cross-sectionally, LTCS with none-to-low BF reported better HRQOL at baseline and at follow-up than LTCS with higher BF. Longitudinally, no difference was found between none-to-low and moderate-to-high BF on the HRQOL change from baseline to follow-up. HRQOL differences between the PTG groups were not statistically significant cross-sectionally and longitudinally, except those participants with moderate-to-high PTG reported higher role functioning and global health status/QOL. CONCLUSIONS: Cross-sectionally, BF was significantly negatively related to subscales of HRQOL, while PTG was positively correlated to role functioning and global health status/QOL. The results add further evidence that BF and PTG are two different positive psychological concepts.

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 · 10.1080/0284186x.2023.2245560

Cites

29 of 29 references verified0 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?

  • A critical distinction must be made between benefit finding and genuine PTG, which involves enduring and stable revisions of fundamental assumptions about the self and the world.

    “A critical distinction must also be made between ‘benefit finding’ - a short-term coping strategy focused on positive reinterpretation – and genuine PTG, which involves enduring and stable revisions of fundamental assumptions about the self and the world [25, 35–37].”

    From The coexistence and trajectories of posttraumatic growth and depreciation: a 36-month longitudinal qualitative narrative analysis (2026) · cites this paper as [36]

    The Background (page not available) distinguishes benefit finding as positive evaluation of adversity from PTG as psychological change after processing a traumatic event; the Discussion also calls them related but slightly different concepts. The paper does not characterize benefit finding as necessarily short-term or PTG as an enduring, stable revision of fundamental assumptions about the self and the world. (LLM, conf=0.87)

    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

Authors
Liu, Z., Thong, M. S. Y., Doege, D., Koch-Gallenkamp, L., Weisser, L., Bertram, H., Eberle, A., Holleczek, B., Nennecke, A., Waldmann, A., Zeissig, S. R., Pritzkuleit, R., Brenner, H., & Arndt, V.
Affiliations
  • German Cancer Research Center (DE)
  • Division of Clinical Epidemiology and Aging Research, DKFZ, Heidelberg, Germany
  • Cancer Registry of North Rhine-Westphalia, Bochum, Germany
  • Leibniz Institute for Prevention Research and Epidemiology - BIPS (DE)
  • Krebsregister Saarland (DE)
  • Hamburg Cancer Registry, Hamburg, Germany
  • University of Lübeck (DE)
  • University of Würzburg (DE)
  • Cancer Registry of Schleswig-Holstein, Lübeck, Germany
Corresponding author
Arndt, Volker
Venue
Acta Oncologica
Published
2023-08-18
Volume
62
Issue
9
Pages
1124-1131
ISSN
  • 0284-186X (ISSN-L)
  • 1651-226X
OpenAlex
W4385968680
Cited by
15
References
29
Citations by year
2026: 9 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 1
FWCI
1.83
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Acta Oncologica (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Pure Amsterdam UMC (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Funders
  • German Cancer Aid (108262, 70112089)
  • China Scholarship Council PhD Program (201808320419)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Cancer survivorship and care
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health › Childhood Cancer Survivors' Quality of Life
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Neurology › Long-Term Effects of COVID-19
Keywords
benefit finding, posttraumatic growth, health-related quality of life, long-term cancer survivors, cancer survivorship, role functioning, global health status
MeSH terms
Cancer Survivors, Posttraumatic Growth, Psychological, Adaptation, Psychological, Humans, Neoplasms, Prospective Studies, Quality of Life, Stress Disorders, Post-Traumatic

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