About this Research Topic
In recent decades a growing number of studies have described cancer as a “we-disease”. Patients with cancer as well as intimate partners experienced psychological distress. Studies displayed that various relational factors (e.g., attachment style, mutuality, etc.) such as diverse close relationship processes (e.g., dyadic coping, communication, shared-decision making, etc.) have an impact on individual (e.g., physical and psychological health, quality of life) and dyadic (e.g., marital quality and satisfaction, sexual and reproductive health, etc.) outcomes. Thus, programs reducing psychological distress and enhancing dyadic processes were developed.
Despite growing awareness and recognition of the psychosocial impact of cancer on close relationships, several gaps were identified in the extant literature. The present proposal is therefore aimed at addressing current aspects of limitations and to inform future directions.
The impact of certain relational factors and dyadic processes on the quality of life and well-being of the patients, partners and couples remain to be determined. Furthermore, studies are needed to investigate the mechanisms (i.e., mediators and/or moderators) that regulate the associations between relational factors and/or dyadic processes affecting individual and/or dyadic outcomes.
The modest effects reported by the prevention programs and/or clinical interventions developed to date suggest that more studies are needed to better understand for whom (e.g., which type of patients or of couples? which type of cancers?) and when these programs are beneficial. Additionally, factors associated with positive results, timing of the intervention, and the mechanism for therapeutic change should be considered.
Many studies have focused on certain types of cancer (e.g., breast, lung, or prostate cancer) and couples (e.g., heterosexual couples, couples from elevated socioeconomic backgrounds). The aim of this issue is also to highlight studies conducted on types of cancer, cancer stages, and groups currently understudied and underserved.
Additional studies are also needed to explore the experiences of patients and partners during the different stages of the disease and across the cancer care continuum.
This Research Topic will examine couples facing cancer. We aim to make visible the most recent studies:
• Assessing relational factors (e.g., authenticity, mutuality) and their association with individual and dyadic outcomes
• Assessing close relationship processes (e.g., dyadic coping, self-disclosure, shared decision making) and their relationship with individual and dyadic outcomes
• Explaining the relationship between relational factors, close relationship processes, and individual and dyadic outcomes
• Evaluating intervention programs and/or clinical interventions
• Expanding the current literature to include types of couples (gay, bisexual, transgendered patients or partners) in different cultures at different age groups
• Exploring the experience of patients, partners, and couples
• Using quantitative (self-reported data, observation data, daily diaries, etc.), qualitative, or a mixed-methods approaches
• Advancing dyadic measurement, analysis, and research methods
Image credit: Kat Jayne
Despite growing awareness and recognition of the psychosocial impact of cancer on close relationships, several gaps were identified in the extant literature. The present proposal is therefore aimed at addressing current aspects of limitations and to inform future directions.
The impact of certain relational factors and dyadic processes on the quality of life and well-being of the patients, partners and couples remain to be determined. Furthermore, studies are needed to investigate the mechanisms (i.e., mediators and/or moderators) that regulate the associations between relational factors and/or dyadic processes affecting individual and/or dyadic outcomes.
The modest effects reported by the prevention programs and/or clinical interventions developed to date suggest that more studies are needed to better understand for whom (e.g., which type of patients or of couples? which type of cancers?) and when these programs are beneficial. Additionally, factors associated with positive results, timing of the intervention, and the mechanism for therapeutic change should be considered.
Many studies have focused on certain types of cancer (e.g., breast, lung, or prostate cancer) and couples (e.g., heterosexual couples, couples from elevated socioeconomic backgrounds). The aim of this issue is also to highlight studies conducted on types of cancer, cancer stages, and groups currently understudied and underserved.
Additional studies are also needed to explore the experiences of patients and partners during the different stages of the disease and across the cancer care continuum.
This Research Topic will examine couples facing cancer. We aim to make visible the most recent studies:
• Assessing relational factors (e.g., authenticity, mutuality) and their association with individual and dyadic outcomes
• Assessing close relationship processes (e.g., dyadic coping, self-disclosure, shared decision making) and their relationship with individual and dyadic outcomes
• Explaining the relationship between relational factors, close relationship processes, and individual and dyadic outcomes
• Evaluating intervention programs and/or clinical interventions
• Expanding the current literature to include types of couples (gay, bisexual, transgendered patients or partners) in different cultures at different age groups
• Exploring the experience of patients, partners, and couples
• Using quantitative (self-reported data, observation data, daily diaries, etc.), qualitative, or a mixed-methods approaches
• Advancing dyadic measurement, analysis, and research methods
Image credit: Kat Jayne
Keywords: Cancer, couples, relational factors, dyadic processes, individual and dyadic outcomes, prevention and intervention programs, dyadic measurement and research methods
Important Note: All contributions to this Research Topic must be within the scope of the section and journal to which they are submitted, as defined in their mission statements. Frontiers reserves the right to guide an out-of-scope manuscript to a more suitable section or journal at any stage of peer review.
