Cited by 39Cancer survivorship and carePalliative and Oncologic CarePain Management and Opioid Use

The Effectiveness of Psychoeducational Intervention on Managing Symptom Clusters in Patients With Cancer: A Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials

Xiao, Wenli, Chow, Ka Ming, So, Winnie K. W., Leung, Doris Y. P., Chan, Carmen W. H.·2016·Cancer Nursing

Abstract

Background: Managing symptom clusters instead of single symptoms could be more beneficial in cancer care. Psychoeducational intervention (PEI) has been highlighted as a promising symptom intervention, but the effect of PEI in the management of cancer symptom clusters remains unknown. Objective: The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of PEI on managing symptom clusters in patients with cancer. Methods: Six databases were searched, together with hand searching, to identify eligible randomized controlled trials from the year 2001 to July 2014. Data selection, quality appraisal of studies, and data extraction were conducted independently by 2 reviewers. Data were synthesized by use of a systematic narrative approach, and meta-analysis was conducted when this was possible. Results: Four eligible studies involving 343 cancer patients were included in the review. The methodological quality of the studies was generally fair. Symptom clusters seemed to improve with the provision of PEI. Meta-analysis shows significant improvement in functional performance. Conclusions: The evidence that PEI could alleviate cancer symptom clusters is encouraging but inconclusive in this review. Future well-designed investigations testing some commonly used PEI such as progressive muscle relaxation and patient education on various types of cancer symptom clusters are warranted. Implications for Practice: This review suggests a promising role of PEI in managing cancer symptom clusters. Healthcare providers should increase their awareness of managing symptom clusters using PEI to yield more effective and efficient cancer care.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1097/ncc.0000000000000313

Cites

45 of 45 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Xiao, W., Chow, K. M., So, W. K. W., Leung, D. Y. P., & Chan, C. W. H.
Affiliations
Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine (CN)
Corresponding author
Chan, Carmen W. H.
Venue
Cancer Nursing
Published
2016-07
Volume
39
Issue
4
Pages
279-291
ISSN
  • 0162-220X (ISSN-L)
  • 1538-9804
OpenAlex
W2324477587
Cited by
39
References
45
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 5
FWCI
0.29
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Cancer Nursing (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
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 › Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine › Pain Management and Opioid Use
Keywords
psychoeducational intervention, symptom management, cancer patients, functional performance, progressive muscle relaxation, patient education, palliative care
MeSH terms
Behavioral Medicine, Counseling, Humans, Neoplasms, Patient Education as Topic, Quality of Life, Syndrome, Patient Outcome Assessment

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