Abstract
Purpose
Socially supportive relationships help cancer survivors cope with their diagnosis and may improve quality of life; however, many survivors report unmet support and information needs. Online communities of survivors may address these needs, but research on their benefits have been equivocal. This cross-sectional, self-report study investigated relationships among cancer survivors’ level of engagement in an online survivor community (The American Cancer Society Cancer Survivors Network®; CSN), perceptions of emotional/informational support available from online communities (“online social support”), well-being, and moderating effects of “offline social support.”
Methods
Participants were 1255 registered users of the CSN who completed surveys between 2013 and 2014. Three types of engagement with the CSN—social/communal, interpersonal communication, and informational/search engagement—were identified through principal components analysis. Regression analyses examined hypotheses.
Results
More frequent social/communal and interpersonal communication engagement were associated with increased online social support (p < .0001), and the relationship between interpersonal communication engagement and online social support was strongest for survivors reporting lower offline social support (interaction β = − .35, p < .001). Greater online social support was associated with increased well-being, but only among survivors reporting low offline social support (interaction β = − .35, p < .0001).
Conclusions
Engagement in online survivor communities may increase support perceptions that promote well-being, but benefits may accrue more to survivors reporting low offline social support.
Implications for Cancer survivors
Newly diagnosed cancer survivors, particularly those with unmet emotional/informational support needs, should be given the opportunity to communicate with other survivors through online survivor support networks.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
American Cancer Society. Cancer treatment and survivorship facts & figures 2014–2015. Atlanta: American Cancer Society;2014
Mayer DK, Nasso SF, Earp JA (2017) Defining cancer survivors, their needs, and perspectives on survivorship health care in the USA. Lancet Oncol 18(1):e11–e18
Hewitt M, Greenfield SF, Stovall E (2006) From cancer patient to cancer survivor: lost in transition. National Academies Press, Washington, DC
Hesse BW, Arora NK, Burke Beckjord E, Finney Rutten LJ (2008) Information support for cancer survivors. Cancer. 112(11 Suppl):2529–2540
Pinquart M, Hoffken K, Silbereisen RK, Wedding U (2007) Social support and survival in patients with acute myeloid leukaemia. Support Care Cancer 15(1):81–87
Haviland J, Sodergren S, Calman L, Corner J, Din A, Fenlon D, Grimmett C, Richardson A, Smith PW, Winter J, members of Study Advisory Committee, Foster C (2017) Social support following diagnosis and treatment for colorectal cancer and associations with health-related quality of life: results from the UK ColoREctal wellbeing (CREW) cohort study. Psychooncology. 26(12):2276–2284
Gonzalez-Saenz de Tejada M, Bilbao A, Bare M et al (2016) Association of social support, functional status, and psychological variables with changes in health-related quality of life outcomes in patients with colorectal cancer. Psychooncology. 25(8):891–897
Hughes S, Jaremka LM, Alfano CM, Glaser R, Povoski SP, Lipari AM, Agnese DM, Farrar WB, Yee LD, Carson WE 3rd, Malarkey WB, Kiecolt-Glaser JK (2014) Social support predicts inflammation, pain, and depressive symptoms: longitudinal relationships among breast cancer survivors. Psychoneuroendocrinology. 42:38–44
Nausheen B, Gidron Y, Peveler R, Moss-Morris R (2009) Social support and cancer progression: a systematic review. J Psychosom Res 67(5):403–415
Bender JL, Jimenez-Marroquin MC, Ferris LE, Katz J, Jadad AR (2013) Online communities for breast cancer survivors: a review and analysis of their characteristics and levels of use. Support Care Cancer 21(5):1253–1263
Hong Y, Pena-Purcell NC, Ory MG (2012) Outcomes of online support and resources for cancer survivors: a systematic literature review. Patient Educ Couns 86(3):288–296
van Eenbergen MC, van de Poll-Franse LV, Heine P, Mols F (2017) The impact of participation in online cancer communities on patient reported outcomes: systematic review. JMIR Cancer 3(2):e15
Salzer MS, Palmer SC, Kaplan K, Brusilovskiy E, ten Have T, Hampshire M, Metz J, Coyne JC (2010) A randomized, controlled study of internet peer-to-peer interactions among women newly diagnosed with breast cancer. Psychooncology. 19(4):441–446
Hoybye MT, Dalton SO, Deltour I, Bidstrup PE, Frederiksen K, Johansen C (2010) Effect of internet peer-support groups on psychosocial adjustment to cancer: a randomised study. Br J Cancer 102(9):1348–1354
McAlpine H, Joubert L, Martin-Sanchez F, Merolli M, Drummond KJ (2015) A systematic review of types and efficacy of online interventions for cancer patients. Patient Educ Couns 98(3):283–295
Zhang S, Bantum E, Owen J, Elhadad N (2014) Does sustained participation in an online health community affect sentiment? AMIA Annu Symp Proc 2014:1970–1979
Cutrona CE, Russell DW (1990) Type of social support and specific stress: toward a theory of optimal matching. In: Sarason BR, Sarason IG, Pierce GR (eds) Social support: an interactional view. Wiley, New York
Lee SY, Hawkins R (2010) Why do patients seek an alternative channel? The effects of unmet needs on patients’ health-related internet use. J Health Commun 15(2):152–166
Namkoong K, Shah DV, Gustafson DH (2017) Offline social relationships and online cancer communication: effects of social and family support on online social network building. Health Commun 32(11):1422–1429
Fallon EA, Driscoll D, Smith T, Richardson K, Portier K Description, characterization, and evaluation of an online social networking community: the American Cancer Society’s Cancer Survivors Network. J Cancer Surviv 12(5):691–701
Parkerson GR Jr, Michener JL, Wu LR et al (1989) Associations among family support, family stress, and personal functional health status. J Clin Epidemiol 42(3):217–229
Sherbourne CD, Stewart AL (1991) The MOS social support survey. Soc Sci Med 32(6):705–714
Cella DF, Tulsky DS, Gray G, Sarafian B, Linn E, Bonomi A, Silberman M, Yellen SB, Winicour P, Brannon J (1993) The functional assessment of cancer therapy scale: development and validation of the general measure. J Clin Oncol 11(3):570–579
Yost KJ, Thompson CA, Eton DT, Allmer C, Ehlers SL, Habermann TM, Shanafelt TD, Maurer MJ, Slager SL, Link BK, Cerhan JR (2013) The Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy–General (FACT-G) is valid for monitoring quality of life in patients with non-Hodgkin lymphoma. Leuk Lymphoma 54(2):290–297
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
This study was funded by The American Cancer Society.
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Ethical approval
All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.
Informed consent
Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.
Additional information
Publisher’s note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Electronic supplementary material
ESM 1
(DOCX 15 kb)
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Westmaas, J.L., Fallon, E., McDonald, B.R. et al. Investigating relationships among cancer survivors’ engagement in an online support community, social support perceptions, well-being, and moderating effects of existing (offline) social support. Support Care Cancer 28, 3791–3799 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-019-05193-2
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-019-05193-2