Background: In recent years, authors have repeatedly reported on the significance of social support in cancer survival. Although overall the studies appear to be convincing, little is known about which types of social support promote better survival rates, and which subgroups of cancer patients are more susceptible to the benefits of it. The aim of this study was to identify, organize, and examine studies reporting on the significance of social support in cancer survival. Methods:The PubMed, CINAHL and EBSCO databases were searched using the keywords social support/marital status, cancer, and survival/mortality. Where possible we used a meta-analytical approach, specifically a random effect model, in order to combine the results of the hazard ratios in studies from which this information could be obtained. When interpreting clinical relevance, we used the number needed to treat (NNT).Results: Better survival was observed in married patients when compared to unmarried (single, never-married, divorced/separated, and widowed) in overall and cancer-specific survival. Gender group differences showed that the association was statistically significant only in cancer-specific survival when comparing divorced/separated male and female cancer patients (p < 0.001), thus confirming results from the previous meta-analysis. Conclusions: Being unmarried is associated with significantly worse overall and cancer-specific survival. The most vulnerable group found in our study were divorced/separated men. The results of this review can motivate physicians, oncologists, and other healthcare professionals to be aware of the importance of patients' social support, especially in the identified sub-group.

<b><i>Introduction:</i></b> The development of a family history (FH) questionnaire (FHQ) provides an insight into a patient’s familiarity of a trait and helps to identify individuals at increased risk of disease. A critical aspect of developing a new tool is exploring users’ experience. <b><i>Objective:</i></b> The objective of this study was to examine users’ experience, obstacles and challenges, and their views and concerns in the applicability of a new tool for determining genetic risk in Slovenia’s primary care. <b><i>Methods:</i></b> We used a qualitative approach. The participants completed a risk assessment software questionnaire that calculates users’ likelihood of developing familial diseases. Audio-taped semi-structured telephone interviews were conducted to evaluate their experience. There were 21 participants, and analyses using the constant comparative method were employed. <b><i>Results:</i></b> We identified 3 main themes: obstacles/key issues, suggestions for improvements, and coping. The participants were poorly satisfied with the clarity of instructions, technical usability problems, and issues with the entry of relatives’ data. They expressed satisfaction with some of the characteristics of the FHQ (e.g., straightforward and friendly format, easy entry, and comprehension). They suggested simpler language, that the disease risk should be targeted toward the disease, that the FHQ should include patient-specific recommendations, and that it should be part of the electronic medical records. When discussing what would they do with the results of the FHQ, the participants used different coping strategies: active (e.g., seeking information) or passive (e.g., avoidance). <b><i>Discussion/Conclusion:</i></b> User experience was shown to be a synthesis of obstacles, overcoming them with suggestions for improvements, and exploration of various coping mechanisms that may emerge from dealing with the stressor of “being at risk.”