Cited by 18Cancer survivorship and careDigital Mental Health InterventionsTelemedicine and Telehealth Implementation

It's time to address fear of cancer recurrence in family caregivers: usability study of an virtual version of the Family Caregiver—Fear Of Recurrence Therapy (FC-FORT)

Open access
Lamarche, Jani, Cusson, Angélica, Nissim, Rinat, Avery, Jonathan, Wong, Jiahui, Maheu, Christine, Lambert, Sylvie D., Laizner, Andrea M. +3 more·2023·Frontiers in Digital Health

Abstract

Background: Family caregivers of cancer survivors experience equal or greater levels of fear of cancer recurrence (FCR) than survivors themselves. Some interventions have demonstrated their ability to reduce FCR among cancer survivors and dyads (patient and caregivers). However, to date, no validated intervention exists to focus solely on family caregiver's FCR. Objectives: This study aimed to (1) adapt the evidence-based in-person Fear Of Recurrence Therapy (FORT) for family caregivers (referred here in as FC-FORT) and to a virtual delivery format and (2) test its usability when offered virtually. Methods: The adaptation of FC-FORT was overseen by an advisory board and guided by the Information Systems Research Framework. Following this adaptation, female family caregivers and therapists were recruited for the usability study. Participants took part in 7 weekly virtual group therapy sessions, a semi-structured exit interview and completed session feedback questionnaires. Therapists were offered a virtual training and weekly supervision. Fidelity of treatment administration was assessed each session. Quantitative data were analyzed using descriptive statistics. Exit interviews were transcribed verbatim using NVivo Transcription and coded using conventional content analysis. Results were presented back to the advisory board to further refine FC-FORT. Results: The advisory board (n = 16) met virtually on 7 occasions to adapt FC-FORT (i.e., patient manuals, virtual format) and discuss recruitment strategies. Minor (e.g., revised text, adapted materials to virtual format) and major adaptations (e.g., added and rearranged sessions) were made to FC-FORT and subsequently approved by the advisory board. Four family caregivers and three therapists took part in the first round of the usability testing. Six family caregivers and the same three therapists took part in the second round. Overall, participants were very satisfied with FC-FORT's usability. Qualitative analysis identified 4 key themes: usability of FC-FORT, satisfaction and engagement with content, group cohesion, and impact of FC-FORT. All participants indicated that they would recommend FC-FORT to others as is. Conclusions: Using a multidisciplinary advisory board, our team successfully adapted FC-FORT and tested its usability using videoconferencing. Results from this study indicate that the efficacy and acceptability of FC-FORT are now ready to be tested in a larger pilot study.

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 · 10.3389/fdgth.2023.1129536

Cites

55 of 55 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?

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: 3

  1. [43]Fast J, Duncan K, Dunlop C, Eales J, Keating N, Lero D, et al. Policy brief No. 2-gender differences in family/friend caregiving in Canada. Popul Change Lifecourse Strateg Knowl Cluster Res Policy Brief. (2011) 1(2):1–4. Available at: https://ir.lib.uwo.ca/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1003&context=pclc_rpb
  2. [44]Hevner AR. A three cycle view of design science research. Scand J Inf Syst. (2007) 19(2): 87– 92. 10.1002/pon.6149 · DOI
  3. [61]Rivera-Olvera I Maheu C Lebel S Mohar A Gálvez-Hernández L. Cultural adaptation of FORT for Mexican breast cancer survivors. Paper presented at the international pschosocial oncology conference world congress of psycho-oncology; Toronto, Canada (2022). Available at: https://journals.lww.com/jporp/Documents/2022%20IPOS%20Congress%20Abstracts.pdf

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Lamarche, J., Cusson, A., Nissim, R., Avery, J., Wong, J., Maheu, C., Lambert, S. D., Laizner, A. M., Jones, J., Esplen, M. J., & Lebel, S.
Affiliations
  • University of Ottawa (CA)
  • University Health Network (CA)
  • McGill University (CA)
  • St Mary's Hospital Centre (CA)
  • University of Toronto (CA)
Corresponding author
Lamarche, Jani
Venue
Frontiers in Digital Health
Published
2023-08-21
Volume
5
Pages
1129536-1129536
ISSN
2673-253X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4386033111
Cited by
18
References
55
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 5
FWCI
2.19
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Frontiers in Digital Health (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • eScholarship@McGill (McGill) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
  • University of Ottawa
  • Canadian Institutes of Health Research
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Cancer survivorship and care
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Digital Mental Health Interventions
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Telemedicine and Telehealth Implementation
Keywords
fear of cancer recurrence, family caregivers, cancer survivors, virtual group therapy, videoconferencing, intervention adaptation, usability testing, acceptability, group cohesion

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