Cited by 47Cancer survivorship and carePatient-Provider Communication in HealthcarePalliative and Oncologic Care

Systematic screening for distress in oncology practice using the Distress Barometer: the impact on referrals to psychosocial care

Bauwens, Sabien, Baillon, Catherine, Distelmans, Willem, Theuns, Peter·2014·Psycho-Oncology

Abstract

PURPOSE: This study evaluates how patterns of psychosocial referral of patients with elevated distress differ in a 'systematic screening for distress' condition versus a 'usual practice' condition in ambulatory oncology practice. METHODS: The psychosocial referral process in a 2-week usual practice (N=278) condition was compared with a 2-week 'using the Distress Barometer as a screening instrument' (N=304) condition in an outpatient clinic with seven consulting oncologists. RESULTS: Out of all distressed patients in the usual practice condition, only 5.5% of patients detected with distress were actually referred to psychosocial counselling, compared with 69.1% of patients detected with distress in the condition with systematic screening using the Distress Barometer. Only 3.7% of patients detected with distress in the usual practice condition finally accepted this referral, compared with 27.6% of patients detected with distress in the screening condition. CONCLUSIONS: Using the Distress Barometer as a self-report screening instrument prior to oncological consultation optimises detection of elevated distress in patients, and this results in a higher number of performed and accepted referrals, but cannot by itself guarantee actual psychosocial referral or acceptance of referral. There is not only a problem of poor detection of distress in cancer patients but also a need for better decision-making and communication between oncologists and patients about this issue.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/pon.3484

Cites

37 of 37 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • A study of screening for psychological distress among cancer patients revealed that screening increased the number of distressed patients who accepted psychological treatment when referred (Bauwens et al., 2014).

    “which is consistent with a study of screening for psychological distress among cancer patients which revealed that screening increased the number of distressed patients who accepted psychological treatment when referred (Bauwens et al., 2014).”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Bauwens, S., Baillon, C., Distelmans, W., & Theuns, P.
Affiliations
  • Universitair Ziekenhuis Brussel (BE)
  • Vrije Universiteit Brussel (BE)
Corresponding author
Bauwens, Sabien
Venue
Psycho-Oncology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2014-01-24
Volume
23
Issue
7
Pages
804-811
ISSN
  • 1057-9249 (ISSN-L)
  • 1099-1611
OpenAlex
W1694125498
Cited by
47
References
37
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 2
FWCI
2.09
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Psycho-Oncology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • VUBIR (Vrije Universiteit Brussel) (submittedVersion)
Funders
'Nationaal Kankerplan' by Belgian Government
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Cancer survivorship and care
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Patient-Provider Communication in Healthcare
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Palliative and Oncologic Care
Keywords
distress screening, cancer patients, psychosocial counseling, referral acceptance, outpatient oncology, self-report screening instruments, oncologist-patient communication
MeSH terms
Adult, Aged, Anxiety, Depression, Female, Health Services Needs and Demand, Humans, Male, Mass Screening, Medical Oncology, Middle Aged, Neoplasms, Patient Acceptance of Health Care, Practice Patterns, Physicians', Surveys and Questionnaires, Referral and Consultation, Socioeconomic Factors, Stress, Psychological

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review