FACT-B was used as the breast cancer-specific quality-of-life measure. FACT-B consists of 5 subscale scores pertaining to 4 well-being dimensions (physical, social-family, emotional, functional) and additional breast cancer concerns. A total overall score is the sum of all subscales. Response options were 0=not at all, 1=a little bit, 2=somewhat, 3=quite a bit, and 4=very much.

Psychometric analysis in our Spanish-speaking Latina sample resulted in modifications to FACT-B: breast cancer concerns subscale. Of 7 items, 2 were dropped because of low item-scale correlations and were conceptually different from the other items on that scale. Modified subscale was scored by summing items. Possible score ranges for emotional well-being were 0-28. Higher scores indicated greater well-being.

FACT-B was used as the breast cancer-specific quality-of-life measure. FACT-B consists of 5 subscale scores pertaining to 4 well-being dimensions (physical, social-family, emotional, functional) and additional breast cancer concerns. A total overall score is the sum of all subscales. Response options were 0=not at all, 1=a little bit, 2=somewhat, 3=quite a bit, and 4=very much.

Psychometric analysis in our Spanish-speaking Latina sample resulted in modifications to FACT-B: functional well-being subscale. Of 7 items, 3 were dropped because items were conceptually different and did not converge psychometrically with the other items on that scale; the remaining 4 items were specific to enjoyment of life, thus we renamed the subscale to "Enjoyment of Life". Modified subscale was scored by summing items. Possible score ranges for enjoyment of life were 0-16. Higher scores indicated greater well-being.

FACT-B was used as the breast cancer-specific quality-of-life measure. FACT-B consists of 5 subscale scores pertaining to 4 well-being dimensions (physical, social-family, emotional, functional) and additional breast cancer concerns. A total overall score is the sum of all subscales. Response options were 0=not at all, 1=a little bit, 2=somewhat, 3=quite a bit, and 4=very much.

Psychometric analysis in our Spanish-speaking Latina sample resulted in modifications to each of the FACT-B subscale. The total overall score is based on the sum of modified subscales (see above primary outcomes for modifications to subscales). Possible score ranges for the total overall score were 0-108. Higher scores indicated greater well-being.

BSI was used to measure general symptoms of distress. BSI consists of 3 scale scores pertaining to general symptoms of distress (anxiety, depression, somatization). Response options were 0=not at all, 1=a little bit, 2=moderately, 3=quite a bit, and 4=extremely. Scores were the mean of nonmissing items. Possible score ranges for depression were 0-4. Higher scores indicated more distress.

BSI was used to measure general symptoms of distress. BSI consists of 3 scale scores pertaining to general symptoms of distress (anxiety, depression, somatization). Response options were 0=not at all, 1=a little bit, 2=moderately, 3=quite a bit, and 4=extremely. Scores were the mean of nonmissing items. Possible score ranges for somatization were 0-4. Higher scores indicated more distress.

Breast cancer-specific distress was measured with the 7 item Intrusive Thoughts Scale (anchored to the breast cancer experience), a subscale of the revised Impact of Event Scale (RIES). Response options were 0=not at all, 1=rarely, 2=sometimes, and 3=often. Using the published scoring algorithm, items were summed after recoding responses to 0, 1, 3, and 5. Possible score ranges were 0-35. Higher scores indicate greater distress.

Waits six months, and at the end of the six months is offered the option of participating in the peer support program.

Total of all reporting groups

Stage 0-Carcinoma in situ;

Stage I, Stage II, and Stage III-Higher numbers indicate more extensive disease: Larger tumor size and/or spread of the cancer beyond the organ in which it first developed to nearby lymph nodes and/or tissues or organs adjacent to the location of the primary tumor

BSI was used to measure general symptoms of distress. BSI consists of 3 scale scores pertaining to general symptoms of distress (anxiety, depression, somatization). Response options were 0=not at all, 1=a little bit, 2=moderately, 3=quite a bit, and 4=extremely. Scores were the mean of nonmissing items. Possible score ranges for anxiety were 0-4. Higher scores indicated more distress.

Using intention-to-treat analyses, used repeated-measures linear regression models to estimate the intervention effects on outcomes. Likelihood-based model estimation assumed outcome responses were missing at random.

FACT-B was used as the breast cancer-specific quality-of-life measure. FACT-B consists of 5 subscale scores pertaining to 4 well-being dimensions (physical, social-family, emotional, functional) and additional breast cancer concerns. A total overall score is the sum of all subscales. Response options were 0=not at all, 1=a little bit, 2=somewhat, 3=quite a bit, and 4=very much.

Psychometric analysis in our Spanish-speaking Latina sample resulted in modifications to FACT-B: social/family well-being subscale. Of 7 items, 2 were dropped because the items were conditional on having a partner (resulting in lots of missing data). Modified subscale was scored by summing items. Possible score ranges for social/family well-being were 0-20. Higher scores indicated greater well-being.

Using intention-to-treat analyses, used repeated-measures linear regression models to estimate the intervention effects on outcomes. Likelihood-based model estimation assumed outcome responses were missing at random.

FACT-B was used as the breast cancer-specific quality-of-life measure. FACT-B consists of 5 subscale scores pertaining to 4 well-being dimensions (physical, social-family, emotional, functional) and additional breast cancer concerns. A total overall score is the sum of all subscales. Response options were 0=not at all, 1=a little bit, 2=somewhat, 3=quite a bit, and 4=very much.

Psychometric analysis in our Spanish-speaking Latina sample resulted in modifications to FACT-B: emotional well-being subscale. Of 6 items, 1 was dropped because of low item-scale correlations and it was conceptually different from the other items on that scale (only positively worded item on the scale). Modified subscale was scored by summing items. Possible score ranges for emotional well-being were 0-20. Higher scores indicated greater well-being.

Using intention-to-treat analyses, used repeated-measures linear regression models to estimate the intervention effects on outcomes. Likelihood-based model estimation assumed outcome responses were missing at random.

FACT-B was used as the breast cancer-specific quality-of-life measure. FACT-B consists of 5 subscale scores pertaining to 4 well-being dimensions (physical, social-family, emotional, functional) and additional breast cancer concerns. A total overall score is the sum of all subscales. Response options were 0=not at all, 1=a little bit, 2=somewhat, 3=quite a bit, and 4=very much.

Psychometric analysis in our Spanish-speaking Latina sample resulted in modifications to FACT-B: breast cancer concerns subscale. Of 7 items, 2 were dropped because of low item-scale correlations and were conceptually different from the other items on that scale. Modified subscale was scored by summing items. Possible score ranges for emotional well-being were 0-28. Higher scores indicated greater well-being.

Using intention-to-treat analyses, used repeated-measures linear regression models to estimate the intervention effects on outcomes. Likelihood-based model estimation assumed outcome responses were missing at random.

FACT-B was used as the breast cancer-specific quality-of-life measure. FACT-B consists of 5 subscale scores pertaining to 4 well-being dimensions (physical, social-family, emotional, functional) and additional breast cancer concerns. A total overall score is the sum of all subscales. Response options were 0=not at all, 1=a little bit, 2=somewhat, 3=quite a bit, and 4=very much.

Psychometric analysis in our Spanish-speaking Latina sample resulted in modifications to FACT-B: functional well-being subscale. Of 7 items, 3 were dropped because items were conceptually different and did not converge psychometrically with the other items on that scale; the remaining 4 items were specific to enjoyment of life, thus we renamed the subscale to "Enjoyment of Life". Modified subscale was scored by summing items. Possible score ranges for enjoyment of life were 0-16. Higher scores indicated greater well-being.

Using intention-to-treat analyses, used repeated-measures linear regression models to estimate the intervention effects on outcomes. Likelihood-based model estimation assumed outcome responses were missing at random.

FACT-B was used as the breast cancer-specific quality-of-life measure. FACT-B consists of 5 subscale scores pertaining to 4 well-being dimensions (physical, social-family, emotional, functional) and additional breast cancer concerns. A total overall score is the sum of all subscales. Response options were 0=not at all, 1=a little bit, 2=somewhat, 3=quite a bit, and 4=very much.

Psychometric analysis in our Spanish-speaking Latina sample resulted in modifications to each of the FACT-B subscale. The total overall score is based on the sum of modified subscales (see above primary outcomes for modifications to subscales). Possible score ranges for the total overall score were 0-108. Higher scores indicated greater well-being.

Using intention-to-treat analyses, used repeated-measures linear regression models to estimate the intervention effects on outcomes. Likelihood-based model estimation assumed outcome responses were missing at random.

BSI was used to measure general symptoms of distress. BSI consists of 3 scale scores pertaining to general symptoms of distress (anxiety, depression, somatization). Response options were 0=not at all, 1=a little bit, 2=moderately, 3=quite a bit, and 4=extremely. Scores were the mean of nonmissing items. Possible score ranges for depression were 0-4. Higher scores indicated more distress.

Using intention-to-treat analyses, used repeated-measures linear regression models to estimate the intervention effects on outcomes. Likelihood-based model estimation assumed outcome responses were missing at random.

BSI was used to measure general symptoms of distress. BSI consists of 3 scale scores pertaining to general symptoms of distress (anxiety, depression, somatization). Response options were 0=not at all, 1=a little bit, 2=moderately, 3=quite a bit, and 4=extremely. Scores were the mean of nonmissing items. Possible score ranges for somatization were 0-4. Higher scores indicated more distress.

Using intention-to-treat analyses, used repeated-measures linear regression models to estimate the intervention effects on outcomes. Likelihood-based model estimation assumed outcome responses were missing at random.

Breast cancer-specific distress was measured with the 7 item Intrusive Thoughts Scale (anchored to the breast cancer experience), a subscale of the revised Impact of Event Scale (RIES). Response options were 0=not at all, 1=rarely, 2=sometimes, and 3=often. Using the published scoring algorithm, items were summed after recoding responses to 0, 1, 3, and 5. Possible score ranges were 0-35. Higher scores indicate greater distress.

Using intention-to-treat analyses, used repeated-measures linear regression models to estimate the intervention effects on outcomes. Likelihood-based model estimation assumed outcome responses were missing at random.

Waits six months, and at the end of the six months is offered the option of participating in the peer support program.