Included study characteristics.

PurposeThe objective of this scoping review is to provide an overview of the available evidence on the effectiveness of web-based interventions for fear of cancer recurrence (FCR) and a discussion of drawbacks and possible improvements for web-based interventions identified in the reviewed studies. These steps fulfil the aim of this review, which is to offer suggestions for developing future web-based interventions based on the reviewed studies.MethodsFive databases (PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, SCOPUS and Web of Science) were searched. Original peer-reviewed articles, written in English, on web-based interventions for FCR were included for review. The data from the included studies was synthesised thematically.ResultsWe included 34 papers reporting on 28 interventions. Most of the studies in the papers were quantitative and mixed quantitative studies with a qualitative element, e.g. an interview post-intervention. Interventions were most commonly trialled with women breast cancer patients. Top three countries where studies were conducted were USA, Australia and the Netherlands. The most common theoretical framework for interventions is cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT), followed by mindfulness-based and mixed CBT, mindfulness, acceptance and commitment therapy (ACT), relaxation approaches. FCR was the primary focus/measure in 19 Studies, in 9 studies FCR was a secondary/related outcome/measure. Overall, the evidence of efficacy of web-based interventions on FCR is mixed.ConclusionsThe existing research suggests several key points for producing more robust evidence about the effectiveness of web-based interventions for FCR. First, the studies suggest that it is a priority to better define eligibility criteria to proactively include people with higher levels of FCR. Second, there is a need for longer-term follow-up and outcome measuring period. Third, research examining the reasons for dropout from web-based interventions for FCR is critical to improve the effectiveness of web-based interventions. Fourth, while web-based interventions do not involve the costs of transportation, traveling time, space, equipment, cleaning, and other expenses, further cost utility analyses should be performed. Finally, future studies should assess how intervention accessibility, adherence, and effectiveness can be improved across different intervention designs, varying from intensive synchronous individual therapist-assisted web-based programme to blended designs combining the advantages of face-to-face and internet-based elements, to entirely self-managed programmes.Implications for cancer survivorsDeveloping and evaluating more accessible FCR treatments have been identified among top international FCR research priorities (Shaw et al. 2021). While there is some evidence that web-based interventions can be as effective as face-to-face interventions, currently there is a dearth of systematic data about the ways in which the web-based modality specifically can enhance supportive care for FCR. Developing knowledge about effective web-based interventions has implications for cancer survivors as they can be presented with more accessible, low-cost and low-burden options for managing fear of cancer recurrence.