Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Engagement with a Social Networking Intervention for Cancer-Related Distress

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Annals of Behavioral Medicine

Abstract

Background

Understanding patterns and predictors of engagement could improve the efficacy of Internet interventions.

Purpose

The purpose of the study was to characterize engagement in a multi-component Internet intervention for cancer survivors with distress.

Methods

Data were derived from 296 cancer survivors provided with access to the Internet intervention and included self-report measures and directly-measured engagement with each component of the intervention.

Results

Over 12 weeks, average total engagement was 7.3 h (sd = 11.7), and 42 % of participants spent >3 h on the website. Participants spent more time using social networking components than structured intervention content. Greater early and total engagement was associated with previous chemotherapy, being female, and being recruited via the Internet. Early engagement was associated with greater fatigue and more social constraints.

Conclusions

For many users, engagement with an Internet intervention was quite high. Reducing attrition and tailoring content to better meet the needs of those who do not engage should be a focus of future efforts.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Andersson G, Bergström J, Hollandare F, et al. Internet-based self-help for depression: Randomised controlled trial. Br J Psychiatry. 2005; 187: 456-461.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Mohr DC, Duffecy J, Jin L, et al. Multimodal e-mental health treatment for depression: A feasibility trial. J Med Internet Res. 2010; 12: e48.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Leykin Y, Aguilera A, Torres LD, et al. Interpreting the outcomes of automated internet-based randomized trials: Example of an International Smoking Cessation Study. J Med Internet Res. 2012; 14: e5.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Wangberg SC, Nilsen O, Antypas K, et al. Effect of tailoring in an Internet-based intervention for smoking cessation: Randomized controlled trial. J Med Internet Res. 2011; 13: e121.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Schover LR, Yuan Y, Sui D, et al. A randomized trial of internet-based versus traditional sexual counseling for couples after localized prostate cancer treatment. Cancer. 2011; 118: 500-509.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Hawkins RP, Pingree S, Shaw B, et al. Mediating processes of two communication interventions for breast cancer patients. Patient Educ Couns. 2010; 81: S48-S53.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Winzelberg AJ, Classen C, Alpers GW, et al. Evaluation of an internet support group for women with primary breast cancer. Cancer. 2003; 97: 1164-1173.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. McTavish FM, Gustafson DH, Owens BH, et al. CHESS: An interactive computer system for women with breast cancer piloted with an underserved population. J Ambul Care Manag. 1995; 18: 35-41.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Owen JE, Klapow JC, Roth DL, et al. Randomized pilot of a self-guided internet coping group for women with early-stage breast cancer. Ann Behav Med. 2005; 30: 54-64.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Hoybe MT, Dalton SO, Deltour I, et al. Effect of Internet peer-support groups on psychosocial adjustment to cancer: A randomised study. Br J Cancer. 2010; 102: 1348-1354.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Salzer MS, Palmer SC, Kaplan K, et al. A randomized, controlled study of Internet peer-to-peer interactions among women newly diagnosed with breast cancer. Psycho-Oncology. 2009; 19: 441-446.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. World Health Organization. Executive Summary National Cancer Control Programmes: Policies and managerial guidelines. 2nd ed. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2002. XII.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Ritterband LM, Thorndike FP, Cox DJ, et al. A behavior change model for internet interventions. Ann Behav Med. 2009; 38: 18-27.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Danaher BG, Seeley JR. Methodological issues in research on web-based behavioral interventions. Ann Behav Med. 2009; 38: 28-39.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Shaw B, Han JY, Hawkins RP, et al. Doctor-patient relationship as motivation and outcome: Examining uses of an interactive cancer communication system. Int J Med Inform. 2007; 76: 274-82.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Wise M, Han J, Shaw B, et al. Effects of using online narrative and didactic information on healthcare participation for breast cancer patients. Patient Educ Couns. 2008; 70: 348-356.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Danaher BG, Smolkowski K, Seeley JR, et al. Mediators of a successful web‐based smokeless tobacco cessation program. Addiction. 2008; 103: 1706-1712.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Strecher VJ, McClure J, Alexander G, et al. The role of engagement in a tailored web-based smoking cessation program: Randomized controlled trial. J Med Internet Res. 2008; 10: e36.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Eysenbach G. The law of attrition. J Med Internet Res. 2005; 7: e11.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Han JY, Shah DV, Kim E, et al. Empathic exchanges in online cancer support groups: Distinguishing message expression and reception effects. Health Commun. 2011; 26: 185-197.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Kim E, Han JY, Moon TJ, et al. The process and effect of supportive message expression and reception in online breast cancer support groups. Psycho-Oncology. 2012; 21: 531-40.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Han JY, Kim JH, Yoon HJ, et al. Social and psychological determinants of levels of engagement with an online breast cancer support group: Posters, lurkers, and nonusers. J Health Commun. 2012; 17: 356-371.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Classen CC, Chivers ML, Urowitz S, et al. Psychosexual distress in women with gynecologic cancer: A feasibility study of an online support group. Psycho-Oncology. 2012; 22: 930-35.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Vilhauer RP, McClintock MK, Matthews AK. Online support groups for women with metastatic breast cancer: A feasibility pilot study. J Psychosoc Oncol. 2010; 28: 560-586.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Duffecy J, Sanford S, Wagner L, et al. Project onward: An innovative e-health intervention for cancer survivors. Psycho-Oncology. 2012; 22: 947-51.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. David N, Schlenker P, Prudlo U, et al. Internet-based program for coping with cancer: A randomized controlled trial with hematologic cancer patients. Psycho-Oncology. 2012; 22: 1064-72.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Kazer MW, Bailey DE, Sanda M, et al. An Internet intervention for management of uncertainty during active surveillance for prostate cancer. Oncol Nurs Forum. 2011; 38: 561-568.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Ruland CM, Jeneson A, Andersen T, et al. Designing tailored Internet support to assist cancer patients in illness management. AMIA Proceedings. 2007; 635–639.

  29. Gustafson DH, Hawkins R, Pingree S, et al. Effect of computer support on younger women with breast cancer. J Gen Intern Med. 2001; 16: 435-445.

    Article  PubMed Central  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Couper MP, Alexander GL, Zhang N, et al. Engagement and retention: Measuring breadth and depth of participant use in an online intervention. J Med Int Res. 2010; 4: e52.

    Google Scholar 

  31. McClure JB, Shortreed SM, Bogart A, et al. The effect of program design on engagement with an internet-based smoking intervention: Randomized factorial trial. J Med Int Res. 2013; 3: e69.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Donkin L, Christensen H, Naismith SL, et al. A systematic review of the impact of adherence on the effectiveness of e-therapies. J Med Internet Res. 2011; 3: e52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Couper MP, Alexander GL, Zhang N, et al. Engagement and retention: Measuring breadth and depth of participant use of an online intervention. J Med Internet Res. 2010; 12: e52.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Glasgow RE, Kutz D, King D, et al. Outcomes of minimal and moderate support versions of an Internet-based diabetes self-management support program. J Gen Intern Med. 2010; 25: 1315-22.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Glasgow RE, Christiansen SM, Kurz D, et al. Engagement in a diabetes self-management website: Usage patterns and generalizability of program use. J Med Internet Res. 2011; 13: e9.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Glasgow RE, Kurz D, King D, et al. Twelve-month outcomes of an internet-based diabetes self-management support program. Patient Educ Couns. 2012; 87: 81-92.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Wangberg SC, Bergmo TS, Johnsen JAK. Adherence in Internet-based interventions. Patient Prefer Adherence. 2008; 2: 57-65.

    PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Strecher V, Shiffman S, West R. Randomized controlled trial of a web-based computer-tailored smoking cessation program as a supplement to nicotine patch therapy. Addiction. 2005; 100: 682-688.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Glasgow RE, Nelson CC, Kearney KA, et al. Reach, engagement, and retention in an Internet-based weight loss program in a multi-site randomized controlled trial. J Med Internet Res. 2007; 9: e11.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Ybarra ML, Eaton WW. Internet-based mental health interventions. Ment Health Serv Res. 2005; 7: 75-87.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Murray E, White IR, Varagunam M, et al. Attrition revisited: Adherence and retention in a web-based alcohol trial. J Med Internet Res. 2013; 15: e162.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Davies C, Corry K, Van Itallie A, et al. Prospective associations between intervention components and website engagement in a publicly available physical activity website: The case of 10,000 Steps Australia. J Med Internet Res. 2012; 14: e4.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Glasgow RE, Christiansen SM, Kurz D, et al. Engagement in a diabetes self-management website: Usage patterns and generalizability of program use. J Med Internet Res. 2011; 13: e9.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Schubart JR, Stuckey HL, Ganeshamoorthy A, et al. Chronic health conditions and internet behavioral interventions: A review of factors to enhance user engagement. Comput Inform Nurs. 2011; 29: 81-92.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Brouwer W, Kroeze W, Crutzen R, et al. Which intervention characteristics are related to more exposure to internet-delivered healthy lifestyle promotion interventions? A systematic review. J Med Internet Res. 2011; 13: e2.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Jacobsen PB, Donovan KA, Trask PC, et al. Screening for psychologic distress in ambulatory cancer patients. Cancer. 2005; 103: 1494-1502.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Roth AJ, Kornblith AB, Batel-Copel L, et al. Rapid screening for psychological distress in men with prostate carcinoma: A pilot study. Cancer. 1998; 82: 1907-1908.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Joinson AN. Self-disclosure in computer-mediated communication: The role of self-awareness and visual anonymity. Eur J Soc Psychol. 2001; 31: 177-192.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Tidwell LC, Walther JB. Computer-mediated communication effects on disclosure, impressions, and interpersonal evaluations: Getting to know one another a bit at a time. Hum Comm Res. 2002; 28: 317-48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Cella D. F.A.C.I.T. Manual. Chicago, IL: Center on outcomes, research, and education, Evanston Northwestern Healthcare and Northwestern University; 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  51. Brady MJ, Cella DF, Mo F, et al. Reliability and validity of the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Breast quality-of-life instrument. J Clin Oncol. 1997; 15: 974-986.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Brooks R. EuroQuol: The current state of play. Health Policy. 1996; 37: 53-72.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Llach XB, Herdman M, Schiaffino A. Determining correspondence between scores on the EQ-5D “Thermometer” and a 5-point categorical rating scale. Med Care. 1999; 37: 671-677.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. Ransom S, Jacobsen PB, Booth-Jones M. Validation of the Distress Thermometer with bone marrow transplant patients. Psycho-Oncology. 2006; 15: 604-612.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Weiss D, Marmar C. The impact of event scale- revised. In: Wilson J, Keane T, eds. Assessing psychological trauma and PTSD. New York: Guildford; 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  56. Edgar L, Rosberger Z, Nowlis D. Coping with cancer during the first year after diagnosis. Cancer. 1992; 69: 817-828.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Baker F, Denniston M, Zabora J, et al. POMS short form for cancer patients: Psychometric and structural evaluation. Psycho-Oncology. 2002; 11: 273-81.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Radloff L. The CES-D scale: A self-report depression scale for research in the general population. Appl Psychol Meas. 1977; 3: 385-401.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  59. Hann D, Winter K, Jacobsen P. Measurement of depressive symptoms in cancer patients: Evaluation of the Center for Epidemiological Studies Depression Scale (CES-D). J Psychosom Res. 1999; 46: 437-443.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  60. Seeman TE, Berkman LF. Structural characteristics of social networks and their relationship with social support in the elderly: Who provides support. Soc Sci Med. 1988; 26: 737-49.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  61. Butler LD, Koopman C, Classen C, et al. Traumatic stress, life events, and emotional support in women with metastatic breast cancer: Cancer-related traumatic stress symptoms associated with past and current stressors. Health Psychol. 1999; 18: 555-60.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  62. Lepore SJ. A social-cognitive processing model of emotional adjustment to cancer. In: Baum A, Andersen B, eds. Psychosocial interventions for cancer. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association; 2001: 99-118.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  63. Lepore SJ, Ituarte PHG. Optimism about cancer enhances mood by reducing negative social interactions. Cancer Res Ther Control. 1999; 8: 165-174.

    Google Scholar 

  64. Danaher BG, Boles SM, Akers L, et al. Defining participant exposure measures in web-based health behavior change programs. J Med Internet Res. 2006; 3: e15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  65. Gorlick A, Bantum EO, Owen JE. Internet-based interventions for cancer-related distress: Exploring the experiences of those whose needs are not met. Psycho-Oncol. 2014; 23: 452-8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  66. McGee,M. Google + Users Spend 3 Minutes Per Month There, ComScore Tells WSJ. http://marketingland.com/google-users-spend-3-minutes-per-month-there-6960 Last accessed on Nov 26, 2012.

  67. Wagstaff K. Social networking: The average user spent only 3 minutes on Google + last month. Time Magazine, published Feb 28, 2012. http://techland.time.com/2012/02/28/the-average-user-spent-only-three-minutes-on-google-last-month/ Last accessed on Nov 26, 2012.

  68. Boyes AW, Girgis A, D’Este C, et al. Prevalence and correlates of cancer survivors’ supportive care needs 6 months after diagnosis: A population-based cross-sectional study. BMC Cancer. 2012; 12: 150.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  69. Giese-Davis J, Waller A, Carlson LE, et al. Screening for distress, the 6th vital sign: Common problems in cancer outpatients over one year in usual care: Associations with marital status, sex, and age. BMC Cancer. 2012; 12: 441.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  70. Carlson LE, Doll R, Stephen J, et al. Randomized control trial of Mindfulness-based cancer recovery versus supportive expressive group therapy for distressed survivors of breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2013; 31: 3119-26.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  71. Owen JE, Bantum EO, Criswell K, Bazzo J, Gorlick A, Stanton AL. Representativeness of two sampling procedures for an Internet intervention targeting cancer-related distress: A comparison of convenience and registry samples. J Behav Med. In Press.

Download references

Conflicts of Interest

Jason Owen, Annette Stanton, Amanda Gorlick, and Erin Bantum declare that they have no conflict of interest. All procedures, including the informed consent process, were conducted in accordance with the ethical standards of the responsible committee on human experimentation (institutional and national) and with the Helsinki Declaration of 1975, as revised in 2000.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Psychology, Loma Linda University, Loma Linda, CA, USA

    Jason E. Owen PhD, MPH & Amanda Gorlick MA

  2. Veterans Affairs Palo Alto Health Care System, National Center for PTSD, Menlo Park, CA, USA

    Jason E. Owen PhD, MPH

  3. University of Hawai’i Cancer Center, Cancer Prevention and Control Program, University of Hawai’i at Manoa, Honolulu, HI, USA

    Erin O. Bantum PhD

  4. Departments of Psychology and Psychiatry/Biobehavioral Sciences, University of California, Los Angeles, CA, USA

    Annette L. Stanton PhD

Authors
  1. Jason E. Owen PhD, MPH
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Erin O. Bantum PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Amanda Gorlick MA
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Annette L. Stanton PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jason E. Owen PhD, MPH.

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Owen, J.E., Bantum, E.O., Gorlick, A. et al. Engagement with a Social Networking Intervention for Cancer-Related Distress. ann. behav. med. 49, 154–164 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12160-014-9643-6

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12160-014-9643-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation