Cancer: review of European guidelines highlights gaps in psychological support

Psychological support is gaining prominence in European cancer care guidelines, but the needs of patients and their loved ones remain unevenly addressed. A systematic review of 38 publications highlights the limited attention given to family-based and digital approaches. It describes existing recommendations without measuring their effectiveness for patients.

Illustration of a conversation between a person with cancer, a loved one and a psychological support professional.
MindsetEditorial illustration, not study data.

Mapping guidelines, not conducting a clinical trial

The researchers examined European guidelines on psychological and cognitive assessment and support for people with cancer and their families. Their search covered guidelines published over the past fifteen years.

They searched PsycINFO, Scopus and Medline and conducted an additional search. Following screening, 38 publications were included. The analysis examined target populations, symptoms, assessment tools, recommended interventions and the methodological quality of the guidelines.

Distress, anxiety and depression take centre stage

According to the abstract, the guidelines mainly target adults with cancer and prioritise psychological distress, anxiety and depression. The Distress Thermometer and the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale are among the screening tools commonly mentioned.

Psychosocial support and supportive counselling are among the most frequently recommended interventions. The authors also note an increase in guideline publications and a growing emphasis on multidisciplinary approaches. This reflects an effort to integrate psychological support into care, but does not demonstrate its actual implementation.

Families and digital approaches remain underrepresented

Family-centred and digital interventions are rarely mentioned in the documents analysed. This limited coverage does not establish that they are ineffective or absent from care services.

Levels of evidence and the strength of recommendations also vary between documents. The authors identify gaps in the inclusion of certain populations, protocols and their implementation. However, the abstract does not provide enough detail to compare countries or pinpoint the groups whose needs are least addressed.

Limitations to keep in mind

Only the PubMed abstract was consulted, not the full text. It does not detail the methodological quality assessment results, differences between countries or how cognitive difficulties are addressed. Funding and conflicts of interest were not checked.

What we can take away

This review highlights uneven coverage of psychological needs in European cancer care guidelines. It cannot rank interventions by effectiveness or establish what support patients actually receive.

Sources and provenance

Partager cet article

X f in

An error or a source to report? Contact the editorial team.