Annals of Behavioral Medicine

, Volume 32, Issue 2, pp 104–110

Efficacy of psychosocial interventions in cancer care: Evidence is weaker than it first looks

  • James C. Coyne
  • Stephen J. Lepore
  • Steven C. Palmer

DOI: 10.1207/s15324796abm3202_5

Cite this article as:
Coyne, J.C., Lepore, S.J. & Palmer, S.C. ann. behav. med. (2006) 32: 104. doi:10.1207/s15324796abm3202_5


With increasing sophistication, successive reviews find weaker evidence for the efficacy of psychosocial interventions to reduce distress among cancer patients. However, these appraisals may still be overly positive because of reviewers’ uncritical acceptance of flaws in the design, analysis, and reporting of the results of such trials. Using randomized trials from high-impact journals, we show confirmatory bias, selective reporting of the most favorable of multiple outcome measures, suppressing of null results in subsequent citations of trials, and dropping of data for patients least likely to benefit from intervention. The conclusion that typical cancer patients do not benefit from interventions to reduce distress is strengthened when these endemic problems with the literature are taken into account. Required registering of the details of clinical trials and adherence to CONSORT reduces but does not eliminate bias in the literature.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Copyright information

© The Society of Behavioral Medicine 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • James C. Coyne
    • 1
  • Stephen J. Lepore
    • 2
  • Steven C. Palmer
    • 3
  1. 1.Abramson Cancer Center of the University of PennsylvaniaUSA
  2. 2.Temple UniversityUSA
  3. 3.Abramson Cancer Center of the University of PennsylvaniaUSA
  4. 4.Department of PsychiatryUniversity of Pennsylvania School of MedicinePhiladelphia

Personalised recommendations