↓ Skip to main content

Protocol of a randomized controlled trial of the fear of recurrence therapy (FORT) intervention for women with breast or gynecological cancer

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Cancer, April 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (77th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (86th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
7 X users
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Readers on

mendeley
244 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Protocol of a randomized controlled trial of the fear of recurrence therapy (FORT) intervention for women with breast or gynecological cancer
Published in
BMC Cancer, April 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12885-016-2326-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Christine Maheu, Sophie Lebel, Christine Courbasson, Monique Lefebvre, Mina Singh, Lori J. Bernstein, Linda Muraca, Aronela Benea, Lynne Jolicoeur, Cheryl Harris, Agnihotram V. Ramanakumar, Sarah Ferguson, Souraya Sidani

Abstract

Clinically significant levels of fear of cancer recurrence (FCR) affect up to 49 % of cancer survivors and are more prevalent among women. FCR is associated with psychological distress, lower quality of life, and increased use of medical resources. Despite its prevalence, FCR is poorly addressed in clinical care. To address this problem, we first developed, and pilot tested a 6-week, 2 h, Cognitive-existential group intervention therapy that targeted FCR in survivors of breast or gynecological cancer. Following the positive outcome of the pilot, we are now testing this approach in a randomized clinical trial (RCT). Goal and hypotheses: This multicenter, prospective RCT aims to test the efficacy of the intervention. The study hypotheses are that, compared to a control group, cancer survivors participating in the intervention (1) will have less FCR, (2) will show more favorable outcomes on the following measures: cancer-specific distress, quality of life, illness uncertainty, intolerance of uncertainty, perceived risk of cancer recurrence, and coping skills. We further postulate that the between-group differences will persist three and 6 months post-intervention. Sixteen groups of seven to nine women are being allocated to the intervention or the control group. The control group receives a 6-week, 2 h, structurally equivalent support group. We are recruiting 144 cancer survivors from four hospital sites in three Canadian cities. The sample size was based on the moderate pre/post-test changes found in our pilot study and adjusted to the drop-out rates. The primary outcome, FCR, is measured by the Fear of Cancer Recurrence Inventory. Secondary outcomes measured include cancer-specific distress, perceived risk of cancer recurrence, illness uncertainty, intolerance of uncertainty, coping, and quality of life. We use reliable and recognized valid scales. Participants are to complete the questionnaire package at four times: before the first group session (baseline), immediately after the sixth session, and 3 and 6 months post-intervention. In the descriptive analysis, comparison of group equivalent baseline variables, identification of confounding/intermediate variables and univariate analysis are planned. Each participant's trajectory is calculated using Generalized Estimating Equation models to determine the time and group effects, after considering the correlation structures of the groups. An intent-to-treat analysis approach may be adopted. Our Fear of Recurrence Therapy (FORT) intervention has direct implications for clinical service development to improve the quality of life for patients with breast (BC) and gynecological cancer (GC). Based on our pilot data, we are confident that the FORT intervention can guide the development of effective psychosocial cancer survivorship interventions to reduce FCR and improve psychological functioning among women with BC or GC. Dr. Christine Maheu registered the trial with ISRCTN registry (Registration number: ISRCTN83539618 , date assigned 03/09/2014).

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 244 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 244 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 32 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 31 13%
Student > Bachelor 27 11%
Researcher 20 8%
Student > Postgraduate 11 5%
Other 47 19%
Unknown 76 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 53 22%
Nursing and Health Professions 43 18%
Medicine and Dentistry 31 13%
Unspecified 6 2%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 2%
Other 25 10%
Unknown 81 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 19 May 2017.
All research outputs
#4,844,424
of 25,517,918 outputs
Outputs from BMC Cancer
#1,205
of 9,010 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#69,981
of 312,739 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Cancer
#17
of 121 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,517,918 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 80th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 9,010 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.7. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 312,739 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 121 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.