Depressive symptoms after lung cancer surgery: Their relation to coping style and social support
Abstract
Lung cancer patients may experience greater emotional distress than patients with other cancers. Studies have shown social support to predict adjustment in other cancers, but findings among lung cancer patients have been equivocal. Coping style has been shown to predict distress among lung cancer patients, but has not been examined in the context of social support. We examined coping style and social support as predictors of depressive symptoms one week after surgery among 119 patients with non-small cell lung cancer. The Beck Depression Inventory was the primary outcome measure. Predictors included age, ECOG performance status, stage of disease, and measures of adaptive coping, less adaptive coping, Directive instrumental social support and Nondirective instrumental social support. Results indicated that 29% of lung cancer patients had scores above a standard cutoff for clinically significant depression. Results also showed that depressive symptoms were directly related to use of less adaptive coping methods and Directive instrumental social support, inversely related to age and use of adaptive coping methods, and unrelated to nondirective social support, stage of disease and performance status. Results extend previous findings by showing that adaptive coping methods are related to severity of distress, and that the benefits of social support may depend on the characteristics of that support.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Higher levels of distress and depression are associated with worse cancer symptom severity and psychological functioning.
“Higher levels of distress and depression are associated not only with worse cancer symptom severity [15] and psychological functioning [16]; but also with inferior survival and prognosis [17].”
From Being present: A single-arm feasibility study of audio-based mindfulness meditation for colorectal cancer patients and caregivers (2018) · cites this paper as [16]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 35 · Cited by 126
- Authors
- Walker, M. S., Zona, D. M., & Fisher, E. B.
- Affiliations
- Washington University in St. Louis (US)
- Corresponding author
- Walker, Mark S.
- Venue
- Psycho-Oncology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2005-11-22
- Volume
- 15
- Issue
- 8
- Pages
- 684-693
- ISSN
- 1057-9249 (ISSN-L)
- 1099-1611
- OpenAlex
- W2022506065
- Cited by
- 126
- References
- 35
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 11 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 9 · 2013: 7 · 2012: 7
- FWCI
- 2.49
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Psycho-Oncology (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- Alvin J. Siteman Cancer Center
- National Institutes of Health
- National Cancer Institute (5 RO1 CA85920-03, R01CA085920)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Cancer survivorship and care
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Family Support in Illness
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Grief, Bereavement, and Mental Health
- Keywords
- depressive symptoms, lung cancer, non-small cell lung cancer, coping styles, social support, instrumental support, adaptive coping, Beck Depression Inventory
- MeSH terms
- Adaptation, Psychological, Aged, Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung, Depression, Emotions, Female, Humans, Lung Neoplasms, Male, Middle Aged, Neoplasm Staging, Personality Tests, Postoperative Complications, Social Support
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