CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 310Cancer survivorship and careCancer, Stress, Anesthesia, and Immune ResponseGlobal Cancer Incidence and Screening

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 65 of the 66 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Influence of psychological coping on survival and recurrence in people with cancer: systematic review

Open access
Petticrew, Mark, Bell, Ruth, Hunter, Duncan·2002·BMJ
DOI 10.1136/bmj.325.7372.1066PMC PMC131179
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Objective: To summarise the evidence on the effect of psychological coping styles (including fighting spirit, helplessness/hopelessness, denial, and avoidance) on survival and recurrence in patients with cancer. Design: Systematic review of published and unpublished prospective observational studies. Main outcome measures: Survival from or recurrence of cancer. Results: 26 studies investigated the association between psychological coping styles and survival from cancer, and 11 studies investigated recurrence. Most of the studies that investigated fighting spirit (10 studies) or helplessness/hopelessness (12 studies) found no significant associations with survival or recurrence. The evidence that other coping styles play an important part was also weak. Positive findings tended to be confined to small or methodologically flawed studies; lack of adjustment for potential confounding variables was common. Positive conclusions seemed to be more commonly reported by smaller studies, indicating potential publication bias. Conclusion: There is little consistent evidence that psychological coping styles play an important part in survival from or recurrence of cancer. People with cancer should not feel pressured into adopting particular coping styles to improve survival or reduce the risk of recurrence. What is already known on this topic: Survival from cancer is commonly thought to be influenced by a person's psychological coping style Some studies have shown that a coping style involving fighting spirit rather than helplessness/hopelessness is associated with survival and recurrence, though the evidence is inconsistent What this study adds: This systematic review suggests that there is no consistent association between psychological coping and outcome of cancer Publication bias and methodological flaws in some of the primary studies may explain some of the previous positive findings There is no good evidence to support the development of psychological interventions to promote particular types of coping in an attempt to prolong survival

Overview

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 · 10.1136/bmj.325.7372.1066

Cites

65 of 65 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

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?

Self-check

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

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 66 references

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Cody, 1994, Psychosocial factors and lung cancer prognosis, Psychooncology, 3, 141

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 201–300 of 310

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Petticrew, M., Bell, R., & Hunter, D.
Affiliations
  • MRC/CSO Social and Public Health Sciences Unit (GB)
  • Queen's University (CA)
Corresponding author
Petticrew, Mark
ORCID
Venue
BMJ
Publisher
BMJ
Published
2002-11-09
Volume
325
Issue
7372
Pages
1066.1
ISSN
  • 0007-1447 (ISSN-L)
  • 0959-8138
  • 1468-5833
DOI
10.1136/bmj.325.7372.1066
PMC
PMC131179
OpenAlex
W2114172104
Cited by
310
References
66
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 13 · 2017: 15 · 2016: 10 · 2015: 26 · 2014: 9 · 2013: 13 · 2012: 18
FWCI
1.54
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
www.bmj.com/company/legal-information/terms-conditions/legal-information/tdm-licencepolicy (tdm)
Locations
  • BMJ (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • ENLIGHTEN (Jurnal Bimbingan dan Konseling Islam) (acceptedVersion)
  • LSHTM Research Online (London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine) (acceptedVersion)
  • DigitalGeorgetown (Georgetown University Library) (submittedVersion)
  • Newcastle University ePrints (Newcastle Univesity)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Cancer survivorship and care
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Cancer Research › Cancer, Stress, Anesthesia, and Immune Response
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Global Cancer Incidence and Screening
Keywords
cancer survival, tumor recurrence, fighting spirit, helplessness, hopelessness, denial, avoidance, psychological intervention, publication bias, methodological errors
MeSH terms
Adaptation, Psychological, Anxiety, Avoidance Learning, Denial, Psychological, Depression, Emotions, Humans, Neoplasm Recurrence, Local, Neoplasms, Prognosis, Prospective Studies, Cohort Studies, Publication Bias, Survivors

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