Skip to main content

Table 2 Studies characteristics

From: Mapping psychosocial interventions in familial colorectal cancer: a rapid systematic review

No. Authors, Publication Year Intervention Type Study Design Diagnosis Cancer History Outcome type Provider’s Background Intervention Format Mean Age N
1 [11] Aktan-Collan et al., 2007 GC Prospective LS Familial A, C, QOL GB FTF 51,6 72
2 [12] Aktan-Collan et al., 2013 GC Prospective LS Familial A, C, QOL GB FTF 44,3 208
3 [13] Anderson et al., 2014 EDU Experimental fCRC Familial A, C CG TEL 51,2 272
4 [14] Armelao et al., 2010 EDU Experimental fCRC Familial B NGB FTF 57,57 796
5 [15] Arver et al., 2004 GC Prospective LS Familial A, QOL GB FTF 42,7 20
6 [16] Baghianimoghadam et al., 2012 EDU Prospective fCRC Familial C NGB FTF 39,05 99
7 [17] Bastani et al., 2015 EDU Experimental fCRC Familial A, B Print/NGB WRT, TEL 51 1030
8 [18] Bauer et al., 2018 EDU/EDU, PSI Experimental fCRC Familial B Print/NGB WRT, TEL 50.8 261
9 [19] Brain et al., 2005 GC Experimental LS Familial A, C, QOL GB FTF 41 26
10 [20] Burton-Chase et al., 2013 GC Prospective LS Familial B, C GC, NBG FTF 42 78
11 [21] Claes et al., 2005 GC, PSI Prospective LS Familial A GB, NGB FTF 39,25 36
12 [22] Codori et al., 2003 EDU Prospective FAP Familial A, B GB FTF 11,8 35
13 [23] Codori et al., 2005 GC Prospective LS Familial A, C GC, NGB FTF 43,8 101
14 [24] Collins et al., 2000 (a) GC, EDU Prospective LS, fCRC Mixt C GC, GB, NGB FTF 46,7 126
15 [25] Collins et al., 2000 (b) GC, EDU Prospective LS, fCRC Mixt A GC, GB, NGB FTF 47 127
16 [26] Collins et al., 2005 GC, EDU Prospective LS Familial B NS FTF 41,33 114
17 [27] Collins et al., 2007 GC, EDU Prospective LS Familial A NS FTF 41 73
18 [28] Dudok deWit et al., 1998 GC Prospective FAP Familial A NGB FTF 28,6 23
19 [29] Esplen et al., 2019 EDU, PSI Experimental fCRC Familial B, C GC/NBG FTF/TEL 47.4 278
20 [30] Glanz et al., 2007 EDU Experimental fCRC Familial A, B, C, QOL NGB FTF, TEL 54,4 176
21 [31] Gritz et al., 1999 GC Prospective LS Familial A GC, NGB FTF ns 11
22 [32] Gritz et al., 2005 GC Prospective LS Mixt A, C, QOL GC, NGB FTF ns 155
23 [33] Hadley et al., 2004 GC Prospective LS Familial B GC FTF 38,1 56
24 [34] Hadley et al., 2008 GC Prospective LS Mixt C, B GC FTF 37 65
25 [35] Hadley et al., 2011 GC Prospective LS Mixt A, B GC FTF 41 129
26 [36] Halbert et al., 2004 GC Prospective LS Familial B NGB FTF 49,3 71
27 [37] Hasenbring et al., 2011 GC Prospective LS Mixt A GB, NGB FTF 40,86 122
28 [38] Hawkes et al., 2012 PSI Prospective fCRC Familial A, B, QOL NGB TEL 47,3 22
29 [39] Ho et al., 2012 PSI Prospective LS, FAP Mixt A, C NGB FTF 49,4 22
30 [40] Ingrand et al., 2016 EDU Experimental fCRC Mixt B Print/NGB WRT, TEL 53,1 429
31 [41] Johnson et al., 2002 GC Prospective LS, FAP Familial B NS FTF 55 65
32 [42] Keller et al., 2002 GC, PSI, EDU Prospective LS Mixt A, C, QOL GB, NGB FTF 43,29 65
33 [43] Keller et al., 2008 GC, PSI, EDU Prospective LS Mixt A, C GB, NGB FTF 44 372
34 [44] Kinney et al., 2014 PSI Experimental fCRC Familial B Print/GC WRT, TEL 50,3 378
35 [45] Loader et al., 2005 GC Prospective LS Mixt A, C, B GC FTF 59,9 38
36 [46] Lowery et al., 2014 EDU/EDU, PSI Experimental LS, fCRC Familial B, C Print/NGB WRT, TEL ns 632
37 [47] Lynch et al., 1997 GC Prospective LS Familial C GC FTF ns 20
38 [48] Manne et al., 2009 EDU/EDU, PSI Experimental fCRC Familial B, C Print/NGB WRT, TEL 47,9 366
39 [49] Manne et al., 2010 EDU Experimental fCRC Mixt A, C, B, QOL NGB FTF, WRT 46,3 213
40 [50] McClish et al., 2014 EDU Prospective fCRC Familial B Print, NS WRT, TEL 46,8 70
41 [51] McGowan et al., 2012 EDU Experimental fCRC Familial B, C NGB FTF 45,5 140
42 [52] Meiser et al., 2004 GC Prospective LS Familial A NS FTF 41,3 114
43 [53] Murakami et al., 2004 GC Prospective LS Mixt A GB FTF 47 42
44 [54] Pieterse et al., 2005 GC Prospective fCRC Mixt A, C GB FTF 48,61 52
45 [55] Rawl et al., 2008 EDU Experimental fCRC Familial B, C Print WRT 53 140
46 [56] Rawl et al., 2015 EDU Experimental fCRC Familial B, C Print/NGB WRT, TEL 60 145
47 [57] Rimes et al., 2006 GC Prospective fCRC Familial A, C GB FTF 44,2 37
48 [58] Salimzadeh et al., 2018 PSI Experimental fCRC Familial B, C NGB TEL 47.2 240
49 [59] Shiloh et al., 2008 GC Prospective LS Mixt A GC FTF 42,45 253
50 [60] Stehpens & Moore, 2007 EDU Experimental fCRC Mixt B, C Print WRT 50,76 91
51 [61] Voorwinden & Jaspers, 2015 GC Prospective LS Familial A, C GC FTF 41,87 28
52 [62] Wakefield et al., 2008 GC, EDU Experimental LS Mixt B, C, QOL Print/NS FTF, WRT 50,5 109
  1. Intervention: GC Genetic counselling; EDU Educational interventions; PSI psychological interventions; Diagnosis: LS Lynch Syndrome, FAP Familial Adenomatous Polyposis, fCRC familial Colorectal Cancer; Cancer History: Familial, Mixt Personal + Familial; Outcome type: E emotional; C cognitive; B behavioural, QOL quality of life; Provider’s Background: GC genetic counsellor, GB medical genetics background, NGB non-genetics medical background; Intervention format: FTF face to face, TEL telephone, WRT written, NS not specified