Objective: Depression and anxiety lead to reduced treatment adherence, poorer quality of life, and increased care costs amongst cancer patients. Mindfulness-based cognitive therapy (MBCT) is an effective treatment, but dropout reduces potential benefits. Smart-message reminders can prevent dropout and improve effectiveness.However, smart-messaging is untested for MBCT in cancer. This study evaluates smart-messaging to reduce dropout and improve effectiveness in MBCT for cancer patients with depression or anxiety.Methods: Fifty-one cancer patients attending MBCT in a psycho-oncology service were offered a smart-messaging intervention, which reminded them of prescribed between-session activities. Thirty patients accepted smart-messaging and 21 did not. Assessments of depression and anxiety were taken at baseline, session-bysession, and one-month follow-up. Logistic regression and multilevel modelling compared the groups on treatment completion and clinical effectiveness. Fifteen post-treatment patient interviews explored smart-messaging use. Results:The odds of programme completion were eight times greater for patients using smart-messaging compared with non-users, controlling for age, gender, baseline depression, and baseline anxiety (OR = 7.79, 95% CI 1.75 to 34.58, p = .007). Smartmessaging users also reported greater improvement in depression over the programme (B = -2.33, SEB = .78, p = .004) when controlling for baseline severity, change over time, age, and number of sessions attended. There was no difference between groups in anxiety improvement (B = -1.46, SEB = .86, p = .097). In interviews, smartmessaging was described as a motivating reminder and source of personal connection.Conclusions: Smart-messaging may be an easily integrated telehealth intervention to improve MBCT for cancer patients.This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

No abstract

Forced border changes and population transfers have affected many nation-states. However, memories of these events are usually described as part of a “unique” national memory of cartographic violence, “lost” territories, and victimhood. In popular representations, often reinforced by the personal memories of the wartime resettled, the territories ceded from Poland (Kresy) and Finland (Karelia) to the Soviet Union after World War II are remembered and imagined as “timeless” places which preserve and encapsulate “Polishness” and “Finnishness.” “Territorial phantom pains” is a central framing idea for us. We understand phantom pains as a social emotion related to memories and postmemories that tells members of a community that the body of their nation is not complete without the detached territories. Phantom pains are nostalgic, romanticizing, but also exclusive keeping memories of the territorial loss as not (only) memories of personal loss of home and heimat, but of a national loss.