MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412487849 · doi:10.1002/pon.70230

Psychosocial Interventions to Relieve Traumatic Stress Symptoms in Family Caregivers of Children With Cancer: A Scoping Review

2025· review· en· W4412487849 on OpenAlexaff
Stephanie Nanos, Argin Malakian, Laura Foran, Elizaveta Klekovkina, Kyle Fitzgibbon, Alan J. Yu, A Mathews, Gary Rodin, Lindsay Jibb

Bibliographic record

VenuePsycho-Oncology · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicChildhood Cancer Survivors' Quality of Life
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of Toronto
FundersNational Eye Institute
KeywordsPsychosocialPsychological interventionTraumatic stressPsychologyCancerClinical psychologyPsychotherapistMedicinePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Traumatic stress symptoms are common, severe, and persistent in family caregivers of children with cancer, but the benefits of therapeutic interventions to relieve them are not well established. AIM: To review, describe, and appraise the available research on psychosocial interventions aimed at alleviating traumatic stress symptoms in family caregivers of children with cancer. METHODS: Systematic searches of APA PsycInfo, CINAHL, MEDLINE, and Embase were conducted to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and nonrandomized studies of psychosocial interventions (NRSIs) for families affected by pediatric cancer in which traumatic stress symptoms were reported as a primary or secondary outcome. Results were screened by independent reviewers in duplicate. 18 articles were included. All were evaluated for risk of bias and data on study design, intervention format, delivery, and impact, and were abstracted for narrative synthesis. RESULTS: Study samples (8-430 participants) were primarily comprised of mothers of children with acute leukemia. Most interventions (1 day-15 weeks) involved an interventionist (n = 17; 94%) and used cognitive-behavioral techniques (n = 14; 78%). Eight RCTs (n = 10; 80%) and seven NRSIs (n = 8; 87.5%) found a significant reduction in traumatic stress symptoms following intervention delivery, with small to large effect sizes (Cohen's d = 0.28-1.30). However, only three RCTs confirmed having adequate power to comment on effectiveness. Risk of bias ranged from low to moderate. CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence and problematic nature of traumatic stress symptoms in this population is well documented in the observational literature. However, the evidence remains unclear as to the effectiveness of psychosocial interventions to alleviate them due to methodological limitations in current interventional research. High quality RCTs that include a diverse group of family caregivers are needed to demonstrate their effectiveness and to inform clinical care practices aimed at improving family wellbeing.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.545
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0060.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.076
GPT teacher head0.471
Teacher spread0.396 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations9
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePsycho-OncologySame topicChildhood Cancer Survivors' Quality of LifeFrench-language works237,207