心理干预对癌症患者自杀的影响:系统综述和网络荟萃分析。

IF 2.3 3区 医学 Q2 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
Psychology Health & Medicine Pub Date : 2024-09-01 Epub Date: 2024-05-24 DOI:10.1080/13548506.2024.2356026
Xinyue Zhang, Dan Zhang, Yuqi Liu, Yinong Tian, Feiping Yu, Yingjuan Cao, Yonggang Su
{"title":"心理干预对癌症患者自杀的影响:系统综述和网络荟萃分析。","authors":"Xinyue Zhang, Dan Zhang, Yuqi Liu, Yinong Tian, Feiping Yu, Yingjuan Cao, Yonggang Su","doi":"10.1080/13548506.2024.2356026","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Numerous psychological interventions are available for suicidal and death ideation (SDI) and suicidal behavior among cancer patients. To identify the optimal psychological interventions for reducing SDI and suicidal behavior in cancer patients. However, it remains unclear which psychological intervention is the most effective. We performed a pairwise and network meta-analysis by searching seven databases from the date of inception until 8 April 2022. An important focus of this network meta-analysis was the comparison of the effects of various psychological interventions on the reduction of SDI and suicidal behavior among cancer patients. For determining efficacy, we used standardized mean differences (SMDs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Besides, a pairwise meta-analysis, inconsistency test, network meta-analysis, the surface under the cumulative rankings curve (SUCRA), comparison-adjusted funnel plot, subgroup analysis, and sensitivity analysis were also carried out. A total of 8 studies involving 1,350 patients were searched in this study. It showed that empathy therapy (SUCRA = 95.3%) has the best effect among the six interventions. Comprehensive psychological intervention (SUCRA = 77.6%) was ranked in the top two positions, followed by meaning-centered therapy (SUCRA = 40.7%). Comparison-adjusted funnel plots revealed no significant publication bias. In addition, our conclusions have not changed significantly after the sensitivity analysis. In this network meta-analysis, empathy therapy was identified as the optimal choice for reducing SDI and suicidal behaviors in cancer patients. Further multi-center and high-quality RCT studies should be conducted to make our conclusion more rigorous.</p>","PeriodicalId":54535,"journal":{"name":"Psychology Health & Medicine","volume":" ","pages":"1377-1399"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The effects of psychological interventions on suicide for cancer patients: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Xinyue Zhang, Dan Zhang, Yuqi Liu, Yinong Tian, Feiping Yu, Yingjuan Cao, Yonggang Su\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/13548506.2024.2356026\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Numerous psychological interventions are available for suicidal and death ideation (SDI) and suicidal behavior among cancer patients. To identify the optimal psychological interventions for reducing SDI and suicidal behavior in cancer patients. However, it remains unclear which psychological intervention is the most effective. We performed a pairwise and network meta-analysis by searching seven databases from the date of inception until 8 April 2022. An important focus of this network meta-analysis was the comparison of the effects of various psychological interventions on the reduction of SDI and suicidal behavior among cancer patients. For determining efficacy, we used standardized mean differences (SMDs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Besides, a pairwise meta-analysis, inconsistency test, network meta-analysis, the surface under the cumulative rankings curve (SUCRA), comparison-adjusted funnel plot, subgroup analysis, and sensitivity analysis were also carried out. A total of 8 studies involving 1,350 patients were searched in this study. It showed that empathy therapy (SUCRA = 95.3%) has the best effect among the six interventions. Comprehensive psychological intervention (SUCRA = 77.6%) was ranked in the top two positions, followed by meaning-centered therapy (SUCRA = 40.7%). Comparison-adjusted funnel plots revealed no significant publication bias. In addition, our conclusions have not changed significantly after the sensitivity analysis. In this network meta-analysis, empathy therapy was identified as the optimal choice for reducing SDI and suicidal behaviors in cancer patients. Further multi-center and high-quality RCT studies should be conducted to make our conclusion more rigorous.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":54535,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Psychology Health & Medicine\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1377-1399\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Psychology Health & Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/13548506.2024.2356026\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/5/24 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psychology Health & Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13548506.2024.2356026","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/5/24 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

针对癌症患者的自杀和死亡意念(SDI)及自杀行为,目前有许多心理干预措施。为了确定减少癌症患者自杀和死亡意念及自杀行为的最佳心理干预措施,美国国家癌症研究中心(National Cancer Research Center,NASDAQ:CRT)于 2010 年推出了 "癌症患者自杀和死亡意念心理干预 "项目。然而,目前仍不清楚哪种心理干预最有效。我们通过检索从开始到 2022 年 4 月 8 日的七个数据库,进行了配对和网络荟萃分析。该网络荟萃分析的一个重点是比较各种心理干预对减少癌症患者SDI和自杀行为的效果。为了确定疗效,我们使用了标准化均值差异(SMDs)和95%置信区间(CIs)。此外,我们还进行了配对荟萃分析、不一致性检验、网络荟萃分析、累积排名曲线下表面(SUCRA)、比较调整漏斗图、亚组分析和敏感性分析。本研究共检索了 8 项研究,涉及 1,350 名患者。结果显示,移情疗法(SUCRA = 95.3%)在六种干预措施中效果最好。综合心理干预(SUCRA = 77.6%)排在前两位,其次是意义中心疗法(SUCRA = 40.7%)。比较调整后的漏斗图显示没有明显的发表偏倚。此外,在进行了敏感性分析后,我们的结论也没有发生重大变化。在这项网络荟萃分析中,移情疗法被认为是减少癌症患者SDI和自杀行为的最佳选择。为了使我们的结论更加严谨,应进一步开展多中心和高质量的 RCT 研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The effects of psychological interventions on suicide for cancer patients: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

Numerous psychological interventions are available for suicidal and death ideation (SDI) and suicidal behavior among cancer patients. To identify the optimal psychological interventions for reducing SDI and suicidal behavior in cancer patients. However, it remains unclear which psychological intervention is the most effective. We performed a pairwise and network meta-analysis by searching seven databases from the date of inception until 8 April 2022. An important focus of this network meta-analysis was the comparison of the effects of various psychological interventions on the reduction of SDI and suicidal behavior among cancer patients. For determining efficacy, we used standardized mean differences (SMDs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Besides, a pairwise meta-analysis, inconsistency test, network meta-analysis, the surface under the cumulative rankings curve (SUCRA), comparison-adjusted funnel plot, subgroup analysis, and sensitivity analysis were also carried out. A total of 8 studies involving 1,350 patients were searched in this study. It showed that empathy therapy (SUCRA = 95.3%) has the best effect among the six interventions. Comprehensive psychological intervention (SUCRA = 77.6%) was ranked in the top two positions, followed by meaning-centered therapy (SUCRA = 40.7%). Comparison-adjusted funnel plots revealed no significant publication bias. In addition, our conclusions have not changed significantly after the sensitivity analysis. In this network meta-analysis, empathy therapy was identified as the optimal choice for reducing SDI and suicidal behaviors in cancer patients. Further multi-center and high-quality RCT studies should be conducted to make our conclusion more rigorous.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Psychology Health & Medicine
Psychology Health & Medicine PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH-
CiteScore
6.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
200
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Psychology, Health & Medicine is a multidisciplinary journal highlighting human factors in health. The journal provides a peer reviewed forum to report on issues of psychology and health in practice. This key publication reaches an international audience, highlighting the variation and similarities within different settings and exploring multiple health and illness issues from theoretical, practical and management perspectives. It provides a critical forum to examine the wide range of applied health and illness issues and how they incorporate psychological knowledge, understanding, theory and intervention. The journal reflects the growing recognition of psychosocial issues as they affect health planning, medical care, disease reaction, intervention, quality of life, adjustment adaptation and management. For many years theoretical research was very distant from applied understanding. The emerging movement in health psychology, changes in medical care provision and training, and consumer awareness of health issues all contribute to a growing need for applied research. This journal focuses on practical applications of theory, research and experience and provides a bridge between academic knowledge, illness experience, wellbeing and health care practice.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信