course materials

1. Caring for The Cancer Caregiver Literature Review Outline
Caring for The Cancer Caregiver Literature Review Outline ON Caring for The Cancer
Caregiver Literature Review Outline–This literature review (five to seven pages, not
including title page and references) should explore psychological ideas and include
five primary references*********-PAPER TOPIC= When should we start to care for the
cancer caregiver? Taking a look at their ive needs and risks for psychiatric disorders.-focus
more on the CAREGIVER and less on the cancer!-ONLY the 5 included sources below can be
used-MUST follow rubricCaring for The Cancer Caregiver Literature Review Outline -
Subheadings (example= title on page 2, references, and at least 2 others in your paper)– you
should NOT have a heading per paragraph -Be sure you are giving credit for each point
taken from a source.(When in doubt, cite)-If more than 1 source provides that same
information DO NOT repeat the information Present the information 1 time and cite all of
your sourcesBe sure you are using your own words.ABSOLUTELY NO QUOTESQUOTING
ALLOWEDIt is better to put everything in your words!!Replace phrase like the authors, the
book, the article … with the author and year.EVERY TIME you use the author’s name, you
MUST include the year. – If primary source only identifies 1 source as for the information,
then give creditto the authors of that source but in place of the year, identify the
sourcewhere you obtained the information.– If the primary source identifies several
sources, then simply reference your primary source because this is their consolidation of
the informationOutline format:-In box form-4 sections= Introduction,Premise 1, =Premise
2,Premise 3,Conclusion*Must have same colors as attached imageFOLLOW THIS EXACT
RUBRIC AreaCriteriaPages5-6 pages of text (not including cover or reference page)–
5 points (5%) for each ½ pageless than 5 or more than 7numbered flush right and in Times
New Roman 12Margins1 inch on each side (including running head)Running headPresent,
proper use of CAPS, flush left, Phrase “Running head” only appears on first page, shorter
than paper title, less than 50 characters,Title PagePresent & includes the following in the
upper ½ of the page:title, student ID#, University Affiliation, Professor, Course, TermTitle
less than 15 words. Title is repeated at start of actual paper.HeadersMinimum number of
subheadings are present and are in correct APA format/levelsFontDouble spaced,
Times New Roman (size 12), no extra spaces between
paragraphsReferences&CitationsReferences cited in text appropriately,Appropriate use of
names (No 1st names, no salutations, no university affiliations)No title (journal, article,
book, etc.) used in textQuotes –maximum 1 quote not more than 3 lines-5 points for each
additional quoteAll references on reference page are cited in text and all text citations

2. present on reference pageReferences list present and in correct APA format – Double
spaced, hanging indents, doi, heading References is not in boldMinimum of 5 references
(beyond class texts); Maximum 7 references3 research studies minimum from psychology
related journalsNo references older the last 10 year (from the 5 primary
sources)WritingThere is a clear introduction, including research question/thesis,Research
question is capable to being adequately addressed in page limitsLiterature used is related to
Research Question/Thesis and connections are made to human thought/behaviorLogical
organization to paper – Appropriate use of SubheadingsInformation under subheading is
related to the subheadingMain Points in review of literature are clearInformation is directly
presented (no statements like … the study talks about X)Statements are ed (cite
information as needed and provide sufficient detail to understand how conclusions were
made)Information from sources is integrated (NOT presented in author/author
order),Conclusion is clear, well ed, follows from the information
presentedResults/Findings discussed without statisticsDisplays objective, unbiased,
impartial attitude and tone. Limits use of first person. No personal storiesIdeas are not
repeated multiple times within the paper (MLA structure not used, using phrases like “as
stated earlier”)Grammar, spelling, and usage (no problems): no contractions, does not start
sentences with quote marks, acronyms or number, awkward phrase, word choicePronouns
– no 2nd person, no 1st person to reference society, noun-pronoun agreementParagraph
structure/ length is correctTense – information from studies already completed are
discussed in past tense Caring for The Cancer Caregiver Literature Review
Outlineattachment_1attachment_2attachment_3attachment_4attachment_5attachment_6Un
formatted Attachment PreviewLiterature Review Rubric – PSYC 2102 Student ID#:
________________________________ DO NOT PUT YOUR NAME ON YOUR PAPER! _____ Your paper is
not being graded because it is not written about human thought or behavior from a
psychological perspective. _____ Your paper is not being graded because there are issues
with plagiarism. _____ Your paper does not follow the format of the assignment (ex. series of
article critiques, study format) Area Criteria Pages 5-6 pages of text (not including cover or
reference page) -5 points (5%) for each ½ page less than 5 or more than 7 numbered flush
right and in Times New Roman 12 1 inch on each side (including running head) Present,
proper use of CAPS, flush left, Phrase “Running head” only appears on first page, shorter
than paper title, less than 50 characters, Present & includes the following in the upper ½ of
the page: title, student ID #, University Affiliation, Professor, Course, Term Title less than 15
words. Title is repeated at start of actual paper. Minimum number of subheadings are
present and are in correct APA format/levels Double spaced, Times New Roman (size 12),
no extra spaces between paragraphs References cited in text appropriately, Appropriate use
of names (No 1st names, no salutations, no university affiliations) No title (journal, article,
book, etc.) used in text Quotes –maximum 1 quote not more than 3 lines -5 points for each
additional quote All references on reference page are cited in text and all text citations
present on reference page References list present and in correct APA format – Double
spaced, hanging indents, doi, heading References is not in bold Minimum of 5 references
(beyond class texts); Maximum 7 references 3 research studies minimum from psychology
related journals No references older the last 10 year (from the 5 primary sources) There is a

3. clear introduction, including research question/thesis, Research question is capable to
being adequately addressed in page limits Literature used is related to Research
Question/Thesis and connections are made to human thought/behavior Logical
organization to paper – Appropriate use of Subheadings Information under subheading is
related to the subheading Main Points in review of literature are clear Information is
directly presented (no statements like … the study talks about X) Statements are ed (cite
information as needed and provide sufficient detail to understand how conclusions were
made) Information from sources is integrated (NOT presented in author/author order),
Conclusion is clear, well ed, follows from the information presented Results/Findings
discussed without statistics Caring for The Cancer Caregiver Literature Review
OutlineDisplays objective, unbiased, impartial attitude and tone. Limits use of first person.
No personal stories Ideas are not repeated multiple times within the paper (MLA structure
not used, using phrases like “as stated earlier”) Grammar, spelling, and usage (no
problems): no contractions, does not start sentences with quote marks, acronyms or
number, awkward phrase, word choice Pronouns – no 2nd person, no 1st person to
reference society, noun-pronoun agreement Paragraph structure/ length is correct Tense –
information from studies already completed are discussed in past tense Margins Running
head Title Page Headers Font References & Citations Writing Total Possible Points for
Paper: 100 Comments: Point Value 0 Points Assigned 1 2 2 3 2 2 4 1 2 5 2 3 2 5 5 6 8 6 5 6 2
6 4 10 2 2 2 Points Assigned: __________ Received: 10 May 2018 Revised: 1 August 2018
Accepted: 5 August 2018 DOI: 10.1002/pon.4859 PAPER Delivering problem?solving
therapy to family caregivers of people with cancer: A feasibility study in outpatient
palliative care | George Demiris2 Karla T. Washington1 Kevin W. Craig1 | Paul Tatum1 |
Debra Parker Oliver1 | David L. Albright3 | 1 Department of Family and Community
Medicine, University of Missouri, Columbia, Missouri Abstract Objective: In response to the
well?documented need for evidence?based cancer 2 School of Nursing, University of
Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania caregiver , we examined the feasibility of
problem?solving therapy for family 3 caregivers of cancer patients receiving outpatient
palliative care and investigated School of Social Work, University of Alabama, Tuscaloosa,
Alabama the impact of problem?solving therapy on family caregivers’ anxiety, depression,
and Correspondence Karla T. Washington, PhD, Department of Family and Community
Medicine, University of Missouri, MA306 Medical Sciences Building, DC032.00 Columbia,
MO 65212. Email: washingtonkar@health.missouri.edu quality of life. Funding information
National Cancer Institute, Grant/Award Number: R21CA191165 Participants (N = 83) were
randomly assigned to receive usual care or usual care plus Methods: We conducted a
feasibility study of a structured problem?solving therapy intervention delivered to family
caregivers of cancer patients receiving outpatient palliative care from an academic health
center in the Midwestern United States. a problem?solving therapy intervention, which was
delivered over three sessions via web?based videoconferencing or telephone. Descriptive
statistics were used to determine feasibility relative to recruitment, retention, and fidelity
to core intervention components. Outcome data were analyzed using ordinary least squares
multiple regression. Results: Problem?solving therapy for family caregivers of patients with
cancer was found to be highly feasible in the outpatient palliative care setting. Caregivers

4. who received problem?solving therapy reported less anxiety than those who received only
usual care (P = 0.03). No statistically significant differences were observed for caregiver
depression (P = 0.07) or quality of life (P = 0.06). Conclusions: Problem?solving therapy is a
feasible and promising approach to reducing cancer family caregivers’ anxiety in the
outpatient palliative care setting. Further testing in multiple sites is recommended. KEY W
ORDS anxiety, cancer, caregivers, depression, family, oncology, problem solving, quality of
life 1 | the home, often with little or preparation.1,2 The numerous B A CKG R O U N D
stressors associated with family caregiving for cancer patients are well In recent decades,
the primary setting for cancer care has shifted from documented and include insufficient or
problematic communication the hospital inpatient unit to the outpatient clinic, leaving
family care- with health care providers, lack of skill needed to complete specific givers
(FCGs) responsible for providing the majority of patient care in tasks (eg, administering
medications and changing dressings), social 2494 © 2018 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/pon Psycho?Oncology. 2018;27:2494–2499. WASHINGTON
2495 ET AL. isolation, and unavailability of necessary information.3 Caring for The Cancer
Caregiver Literature Review OutlineThese stressors Specifically, we set out to achieve the
following aims: (1) to examine can lead to anxiety, depression, fatigue, neglect of self?care,
and, for the feasibility of PST for FCGs of cancer patients receiving outpatient particularly
strained caregivers, psychological symptoms that mirror palliative care relative to
recruitment, retention, and fidelity to core those experienced by trauma survivors.3,4 Early
studies involving bio- intervention components; and (2) to investigate the impact of PST
markers have also identified a physiological toll associated with cancer on FCGs’ anxiety,
depression, and quality of life. Our corresponding caregiving stress, suggesting that highly
stressed FCGs may be at hypotheses were (1) that PST could be feasibility delivered to FCGs
increased risk for morbidity and mortality from certain diseases.5 The of cancer patients
receiving outpatient palliative care and (2) that it extant literature is clear: Cancer
caregiving often takes place in a would result in decreased caregiver anxiety and depression
and highly stressful emotional and social context, leaving FCGs vulnerable improved quality
of life. to significant, potentially long?lasting, adverse effects. 1.1 care | Family caregiver in
palliative oncology 2 METHODS | To achieve the aforementioned aims, we conducted a
single?site ran- Palliative oncology, defined as “the integration into cancer care of domized
clinical trial of a structured PST intervention for FCGs of peo- therapies to address the
multiple issues that cause suffering for ple with cancer receiving outpatient palliative care.
The University of 6 Missouri Health Sciences Institutional Review Board (IRB) reviewed
Although commonly and approved all study activities (project no. 2002215). The study
patients and their families and impact their quality of life,” explicitly 7-10 espouses a
commitment to ing FCGs. misunderstood to be limited to end?of?life care, in the United
States was registered at clinicaltrials.gov (identifier: NCT02427490). palliative oncology is
an interdisciplinary service available to patients and families across the full cancer
trajectory. Research documenting the multiple benefits of early palliative care11 has led the
American 2.1 | Participant recruitment Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) to recommend
that many patients After securing IRB approval, we recruited study participants from the
and families be offered palliative services concurrent with standard ambulatory palliative

5. care clinic of an academic health center in the 12 as palliative Midwestern United States
from October 2015 to February 2017. Cli- care can be provided either alongside
interventions with a curative nicians provided an informational brochure to FCGs
accompanying intent or as an alternative to disease?directed therapies. Although patients
with cancer to the palliative care clinic and requested permis- most palliative oncology in
the United States is presently provided sion to share their contact information with the
research team. In oncologic care as early as the time of initial diagnosis, on an inpatient
basis, it is increasingly being offered in outpatient addition, we placed study brochures in
high?traffic clinical areas clinics,13 creating a potentially ideal opportunity to provide
additional (eg, oncology waiting rooms and patient and family resource centers). to FCGs
in an effort to decrease their distress and improve The study research nurse reached out to
interested FCGs via tele- their quality of life. However, palliative oncology teams wishing to
phone or email to assess their eligibility and schedule a face?to?face capitalize on this
opportunity are limited by the paucity of evidence? informational meeting at the clinic, the
FCG’s home, or another agreed based interventions to FCGs in general14 and in the outpa-
upon location. During the informational meeting, FCGs read, discussed, and—if willing to
participate—signed an informed consent tient palliative care setting in particular.
document, retaining a copy for their personal records. Inclusion 1.2 | criteria required that
participants were English?speaking adult FCGs Problem?solving therapy for FCGs of adult
patients diagnosed with cancer who were receiving palliative Problem?solving therapy
(PST) is a psychosocial intervention that aims care. Family caregivers included those
individuals who provided signif- to enhance coping effectiveness for individuals facing
stressors rang- icant, unpaid care to a person living with cancer; a biological or legal 15 The
theoretical relationship was not required. In addition, participants were required
framework underpinning PST is the relational/problem?solving model to have sufficient
hearing (either naturally or with assistive devices) of stress,16 which conceptualizes
psychological distress such as anxi- to allow their participation in a
technologically?mediated intervention. ety and depression as the consequence of ineffective
coping. The Individuals not receiving formal services from the specialty palliative model
suggests that, Caring for The Cancer Caregiver Literature Review Outlineby enhancing
problem?solving ability, PST can care clinic were deemed eligible for participation if the
patient for minimize the negative effects of stressful life events, leading to whom they
provided care was receiving treatment with a palliative improved well?being (ie, decreased
anxiety and depression and greater intent from the primary oncology team, as understood
by the FCG. quality of life). Multiple FCGs per patient were allowed to enroll in the study.
After ing from daily hassles to major traumatic events. While prior studies have identified
PST as a promising strategy to the FCG signed the informed consent document, the research
nurse reduce distress and improve the quality of life of individuals opened a numbered
sealed envelope, prepared in advance, revealing experiencing stressors associated with
cancer caregiving,17-20 its feasi- whether the FCG had been randomly assigned to receive
usual care bility and efficacy as a stand?alone intervention in outpatient palliative (Group 1)
or usual care in addition to PST (Group 2). A CONSORT flow oncology settings remains
unknown. Thus, in preparation for a large diagram21 summarizing participant recruitment

6. and randomization is multisite trial, our research team sought to test the feasibility of a
provided in Figure 1 (all participants were analyzed in their random- PST intervention for
FCGs in the ambulatory palliative care setting. ized groups regardless of their duration in
the study). 2496 WASHINGTON FIGURE 1 2.2 2.2.1 CONSORT flow diagram Study arms | |
ET AL. applicable problem?solving techniques and to apply them to an acute caregiving
stressor. Group 1: usual care Family caregivers randomized to Group 1 experienced no
changes in the care they or their patient received due to their participation in 2.3 Study
measures | the research study. For these individuals, usual care continued accord- 2.3.1 ing
to each patient and family’s individualized treatment plan based on To measure progress
toward recruiting and retaining an adequately previously established goals of care. While
the specific constellation of large study sample, we established monthly recruitment and
reten- services provided as part of usual care varied, services available to all tion goals
(established by a priori power analysis, described in FCGs participating in the study
included routine education and ongo- Section 2.4.1) and noted our progress toward
achieving them in a ing related to pain and symptom management, professionally? shared
study database. To measure the degree of fidelity to core facilitated groups, and oncology
social work services that, in intervention components, the study Principal Investigator (PI)
or this specific setting, tended to focus primarily on resource allocation designee reviewed a
randomly selected sample of 25% of the versus delivery of formalized psychosocial .
audio?recorded intervention sessions and evaluated them using a | Feasibility measures
treatment fidelity assessment form developed specifically for the study. Fidelity scores for
each session ranged from 0% to 100%, 2.2.2 | Group 2: usual care plus PST with a score of
100% reflecting complete fidelity to the intervention Family caregivers randomized to
Group 2 received usual care in addi- protocol. tion to PST. The PST intervention we tested
was adapted with permission from Problem?Solving Intervention to Caregivers in 2.3.2
End?of?Life Settings (or “PISCES”) of Demiris et al. 18 | Caregiver outcome measures
Modifications In addition to reporting basic demographic information, FCGs partic- included
revised intervention materials that featured cancer?specific ipating in the study completed
standardized instruments measuring examples, referenced palliative care providers, and
illustrated the their anxiety, depression, and quality of life. The Generalized Anxiety
application of problem?solving techniques across the disease and care- Disorder 7?item
scale (GAD?7)22 measured the frequency with which giving trajectory. FCGs experienced
symptoms of anxiety such as excessive restless- A trained research nurse delivered the PST
intervention to FCGs ness, uncontrollable worrying, and irritability. The GAD?7 total over
three separate sessions, spaced approximately 1 week apart. scores range from 0 to 21;
higher scores reflect greater anxiety. Family caregivers were given the option of receiving
the intervention Caring for The Cancer Caregiver Literature Review OutlineThe GAD?7’s
internal consistency (Cronbach ? = 0.92) and test? by telephone, over web?based
videoconferencing, or any combination retest reliability have been ed by prior research.22
The of the two. All sessions were digitally audio?recorded to permit moni- Patient Health
Questionnaire 9?item scale (PHQ?9)23 measured the toring of treatment fidelity. The first
session focused on topics such as frequency with which respondents experienced
symptoms of depres- visualizing success, positive self?talk, and using emotions adaptively.

7. sion such as anhedonia, sleep disturbance, and impaired concentra- During the second
session, FCGs selected a specific caregiving prob- tion. The PHQ?9 total scores range from 0
to 27; higher scores lem and brainstormed possible solutions. In the third and final session,
reflect greater depression. The PHQ?9’s internal consistency FCGs weighed the pros and
cons of various possible solutions to their (Cronbach ? = 0.89) and test?retest reliability
have been ed selected problem, identified a solution (or combination of solutions) by prior
research.23 The Caregiver Quality of Life Index–Revised they judged to be feasible and
likely to result in the most desirable (CQLI?R)24 measured FCGs’ quality of life in four
domains: emo- outcome(s), and developed a detailed plan for its implementation. tional,
social, financial, and physical. Total CQLI?R scores range from Through this process, FCGs
had the opportunity to learn broadly 0 to 40; higher scores indicate better quality of life.
The CQLI?R’s WASHINGTON 2497 ET AL. internal consistency (Cronbach ? = 0.769) and
test?retest reliability 3 | RESULTS have been ed by prior research.24 Family caregivers in
both study groups completed the GAD?7, Study and intervention feasibility were both ed.
We met our PHQ?9, and CQLI?R according to the same administration schedule, recruitment
goal 1 month early, enrolling 83 FCGs in 17 months which included the following
approximate time points: T0 (baseline/ (participant demographic information is
summarized in Table 1). study enrollment), T1 (day 15/intervention midpoint for Group 2),
T2 Approximately 75% of our sample was retained through 30?day (day 30/intervention
conclusion for Group 2), and T3 (day 60/study follow?up. Treatment fidelity, which was
calculated as the mean exit). With the exception of baseline measures, which were
completed percentage of essential intervention elements observed in the sample on paper
during their enrollment visit, FCGs were given the option of of audio?recorded sessions, was
97%. completing the instruments online via Qualtrics (Provo, UT) or by providing their
responses verbally by telephone. Preliminary analyses indicated that randomization
produced equivalent groups in terms of key demographic variables and baseline outcome
measures, which were also controlled for in subsequent modeling (see Table 2); no
statistically significant differences were 2.4 2.4.1 noted at baseline. Results from OLS
modeling, which we conducted Data analysis | | Statistical power calculation We based our a
priori power calculation on changes in GA …Caring for The Cancer Caregiver Literature
Review Outline