The present study offers distinctive benefits in comprehending the crucial aspects that anticipate cancer-related mental trauma in couples who are diagnosed with cancer. However, like any other research, this study comes with some limitations. One of the most notable limitations is that the study's findings cannot be presumed for other population categories, as the samples were mostly middle-aged, white, and educated. Another limitation is the study's methodological constraints and limited sample size that raises the need to incorporate mixed methods in future studies. Qualitative research will help explore the individual experiences of couples with cancer and share how the context adds deep meaning to their struggles. Besides, a larger sample size will add validity and provide more generalized results (Badr & Manne, 2010). Self-report surveys, the study's methodology, have limitations like inaccurate cognitive recall, prejudice, and social desire, as opposed to objective observation measurements (Baltagi, 2014). Finally, these findings need to be taken with caution due to limitations arising from measuring errors and prestige biases that affect the reliability of panel data studies (Baltagi, 2014).

Conclusion

The present study used a dyadic quantitative research approach through APIM (Kenny, Kashy, & Cook, 2006) to capture mindfulness and spiritual well-being's reciprocal association with cancer-related distress in couples diagnosed with cancer. The consequences of a cancer diagnosis on one of the partners emit psychological repercussions that directly impact the other partner (patient to partner and partner to patient; Lerner, 2006) throughout the illness's lifespan. Thus, service providers need to consider both the patient's and their partners' coping mechanisms simultaneously since the partners are mostly informal caregivers of the cancer patients. Our findings are critical to providing psychosocial-spiritual care that couples with cancer require to address their cancer-related distress within the context of their relationship. The findings emphasize the importance of evaluating the adaptive features of cancer patients and their partners and their association with cancer-related distress. The findings also highlight the significance of adopting a dyadic outlook when studying cancer patient and partner outcomes in general.