Breast cancer and prostate cancer self-help groups: Reflections on differences

Gray, Ross E.; Fitch, Margaret I.; Davis, Christine; Phillips, Catherine

doi:10.1002/(sici)1099-1611(199606)5:2<137::aid-pon222>3.0.co;2-e

Cited by 67 publications

(52 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Logistic regression takes into account shared variance, but still three different measures were kept in the equation as significant contributors. Studies have indicated that emotional support is less valued than information by PC patients [39]. However, our results show that lower emotional functioning and higher levels of distress are associated with membership of the patients' association.…”

Section: Conclusion and Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 63%

Features of members of a prostate cancer patients’ association

Voerman

Fischer

Visser

et al. 2006

The Journal of Men's Health & Gender

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: The objective of this study was to compare prostate cancer (PC) patients who are and who are not members of the Dutch prostate cancer patients' association (PCPA) with respect to demographic, medical and psychosocial characteristics. Methods: Using a cross-sectional design, 88 non-members and 150 members of the PCPA were included. Results: The results show that members are younger, have a higher socio-economic status and experience higher levels of distress. Furthermore, members are less content with the patient education and the psychosocial support available in hospital. Members also have a higher need to talk about problems and a more positive attitude towards participation in support groups. Conclusion: It can be concluded that members of the patients' association differ from non-members. This has clinical and methodological relevance for further study among PC patients, as well as practical relevance for the policy of patients' associations.

show abstract

Section: Conclusion and Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 63%

Features of members of a prostate cancer patients’ association

Voerman

Fischer

Visser

et al. 2006

The Journal of Men's Health & Gender

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This might be explained by gender-specific coping styles. Men might prefer problem-focused coping strategies while women possibly prefer coping through mutual support and emotional disclosure within the group [28,29]. However, one should again note that women were in the majority.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 98%

“…Research in cancer self-help groups revealed differences in the needs of men and women within groups [28,29]. Men emphasised the importance of giving and seeking information, whereas women emphasised the importance of intimacy, mutual support and emotional disclosure.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The effect of group cohesion on rehabilitation outcome in cancer survivors

et al. 2007

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The effect of group cohesion on rehabilitation outcome in cancer survivors May, Anne M.; Duivenvoorden, Hugo J.; Korstjens, Irene; van Weert, Ellen; HoekstraWeebers, Josette E. H. M.; van den Borne, Bart; Mesters, Ilse; van der Schans, Cees P.; Ros, Wynand J. G. Take-down policy If you believe that this document breaches copyright please contact us providing details, and we will remove access to the work immediately and investigate your claim.Downloaded from the University of Groningen/UMCG research database (Pure): http://www.rug.nl/research/portal. For technical reasons the number of authors shown on this cover page is limited to 10 maximum. AbstractObjective: Group-based physical training interventions have been shown to be effective in increasing quality of life in cancer survivors. Until now, however, the impact of cohesion within the group on intervention outcome has not been investigated.Methods: We examined self-reported individual group cohesion ratings collected in the first half of a 12-week rehabilitation programme for cancer survivors ðN ¼ 132Þ: Four dimensions of group cohesion were measured, i.e. the bond with the group as whole, the bond with other members, cooperation within the group and the instrumental value. Quality of life, physical functioning and fatigue were assessed before and after the intervention using the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire-C30. Linear multiple multivariate regression analysis was conducted to explore the relationship between group cohesion and intervention outcome.Results: The relationship between group cohesion and outcome was significantly modified by gender. Higher ratings of cooperation within the group predicted better post-intervention quality of life and physical functioning and less fatigue in men, and better quality of life and physical functioning in women. Additionally, women who reported a stronger bond with other members showed a lower quality of life after the intervention. No relationship was found between the instrumental value and the outcome variables.Conclusion: Some dimensions of group cohesion seem to be associated with intervention outcome. The underlying mechanisms need to be unravelled.

show abstract

“…[118][119][120][121][124][125][126] An additional two papers that did not meet the eligibility criteria as they had female-only samples are included in the synthesis because they presented data about women that formed the basis of gender comparisons made by the authors of included studies reporting findings from male participants. 114,122 The details of all included studies are presented in Table 36 and provide the context for the interpretations of each study.…”

Section: General Study Characteristicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A systematic review and metaethnography to identify how effective, cost-effective, accessible and acceptable self-management support interventions are for men with long-term conditions (SELF-MAN)

Galdas

Darwin

Fell

et al. 2015

Health Serv Deliv Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Health Services and Delivery ResearchISSN 2050-4349 (Print) ISSN 2050-4357 (Online) This journal is a member of and subscribes to the principles of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) (www.publicationethics.org/).Editorial contact: nihredit@southampton.ac.ukThe full HS&DR archive is freely available to view online at www.journalslibrary.nihr.ac.uk/hsdr. Print-on-demand copies can be purchased from the report pages of the NIHR Journals Library website: www.journalslibrary.nihr.ac.uk Criteria for inclusion in the Health Services and Delivery Research journalReports are published in Health Services and Delivery Research (HS&DR) if (1) they have resulted from work for the HS&DR programme or programmes which preceded the HS&DR programme, and (2) they are of a sufficiently high scientific quality as assessed by the reviewers and editors. HS&DR programmeThe Health Services and Delivery Research (HS&DR) programme, part of the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR), was established to fund a broad range of research. It combines the strengths and contributions of two previous NIHR research programmes: the Health Services Research (HSR) programme and the Service Delivery and Organisation (SDO) programme, which were merged in January 2012.The HS&DR programme aims to produce rigorous and relevant evidence on the quality, access and organisation of health services including costs and outcomes, as well as research on implementation. The programme will enhance the strategic focus on research that matters to the NHS and is keen to support ambitious evaluative research to improve health services.For more information about the HS&DR programme please visit the website: http://www.nets.nihr.ac.uk/programmes/hsdr This reportThe research reported in this issue of the journal was funded by the HS&DR programme or one of its preceding programmes as project number 12/5001/14. The contractual start date was in June 2013. The final report began editorial review in June 2014 and was accepted for publication in December 2014. The authors have been wholly responsible for all data collection, analysis and interpretation, and for writing up their work. The HS&DR editors and production house have tried to ensure the accuracy of the authors' report and would like to thank the reviewers for their constructive comments on the final report document. However, they do not accept liability for damages or losses arising from material published in this report.This report presents independent research funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR). The views and opinions expressed by authors in this publication are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of the NHS, the NIHR, NETSCC, the HS&DR programme or the Department of Health. If there are verbatim quotations included in this publication the views and opinions expressed by the interviewees are those of the interviewees and do not necessarily reflect those of the authors, those of the NHS, the NIHR, NETSCC, the HS&DR programme or the Department of Health....

show abstract

Breast cancer and prostate cancer self-help groups: Reflections on differences

Cited by 67 publications

References 4 publications

Features of members of a prostate cancer patients’ association

Features of members of a prostate cancer patients’ association

The effect of group cohesion on rehabilitation outcome in cancer survivors

A systematic review and metaethnography to identify how effective, cost-effective, accessible and acceptable self-management support interventions are for men with long-term conditions (SELF-MAN)

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About