Structured PREreview of Exploring Coping Strategies and Quality of Life in Adolescents with Cancer: Pilot Study Findings

Does the introduction explain the objective of the research presented in the preprint?

Yes

The introduction (p. 2) clearly describes the study's aims, "to investigate the relationship between coping strategies and perceived quality of life among adolescents diagnosed with cancer, and to examine the influence of psychosocial factors."

Are the methods well-suited for this research?

Neither appropriate nor inappropriate

There are several issues of note. However, in raising theses questions and comments, I do note that the authors clearly indicate in the title and in the limitations section (p. 5) that this is an exploratory, pilot study: (1) This study has a fairly small sample size (n = 20), with a wide age range (12-18 years). This raises questions about statistical power, generalizability, etc. (2) The study is exploratory, rather than preregistered. This is neither a good, nor a bad thing, given it's nature as a pilot study. However, it is unclear the extent to which other analyses were conducted, but not reported. (3) Missing data is not described or addressed in the manuscript. (4) The measures used (PedsQL and KidCOPE) are described in some detail, but no information is provided about their reliability/validity.

Are the conclusions supported by the data?

Somewhat supported

The authors do an adequate job signaling that these findings are preliminary and tentative. The conclusions are more or less in line with the reported results. The sole p-value reported was checked by the reviewer for consistency and was accurate, based on the reported test statistics.

Are the data presentations, including visualizations, well-suited to represent the data?

Neither appropriate and clear nor inappropriate and unclear

I thought the mean scores for the PedsQL could have been enhanced by also reporting standard deviations to better account for how varied responses may have been in the sample for each dimension.

How clearly do the authors discuss, explain, and interpret their findings and potential next steps for the research?

Somewhat clearly

Is the preprint likely to advance academic knowledge?

I don’t know

Would it benefit from language editing?

No

Would you recommend this preprint to others?

Yes, but it needs to be improved

Is it ready for attention from an editor, publisher or broader audience?

Yes, after minor changes

I think the manuscript could be enhanced with more detail about the methods, recruitment practices, handling of missing data, and inclusion of a data sharing statement, among other comments made in this review. Moreover, I think it would benefit from a more thorough literature review in the background section, describing previous work, in this or other populations, which look at the relationship between coping and QOL.

Competing interests

The author declares that they have no competing interests.