Cited by 171Cancer survivorship and carePalliative and Oncologic CarePalliative Care and End-of-Life Issues

Demoralization and depression in patients with advanced cancer: validation of the German version of the demoralization scale

Open access
Mehnert, Anja, Vehling, Sigrun, Höcker, Anja, Lehmann, Claudia, Koch, Uwe·2011·Journal of Pain and Symptom Management

Abstract

Context The concept of demoralization has been widely used to describe states of existential distress and a self-perceived incapacity to deal effectively with a specific stressful situation.Objectives To evaluate the psychometric properties of the German adaptation of the Demoralization Scale (DS) in patients with advanced cancer.Methods Participants with heterogeneous tumor sites were recruited in several treatment and rehabilitation facilities. Concurrent and divergent validity of the DS was analyzed through associations with and group differences between measures of distress, depression, anxiety, and meaning-related life attitudes.Results From a total sample of 1102 patients, 516 individuals (45%) with advanced cancer were enrolled (male 53%, median age 58 years [range 18-88], breast cancer 21%, prostate cancer 17%). The total mean score of the DS was 29.8 (SD=10.41). Four factors were extracted by exploratory factor analysis, which accounted for 59% of the variation (Cronbach α=0.84): loss of meaning and purpose (α=0.88), disheartenment (α=0.88), dysphoria (α=0.80), and sense of failure (α=0.76). DS dimensions shared between 12% and 62% of the variance. Demoralization was significantly associated with anxiety (r=0.71), depression (r=0.61), and distress (r=0.42). Fifty-seven percent of patients had high distress, 24% depression, and 11% high anxiety. According to different cutoff values, between 16% and 39% were seriously demoralized and 73% had moderate levels of demoralization. Between 5% and 20% of patients were seriously demoralized but not clinically depressed; 60% of patients with moderate levels of demoralization had no depression.Conclusion Results provide further evidence that the DS is a valid and reliable instrument of high clinical relevance in patients with advanced cancer.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2011.02.013

Cites

29 of 29 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 6

  1. de Figueiredo JM. Depression and demoraliza- tion: phenomenologic differences and research per- spectives. Compr Psychiatry 1993;34:308e311.
  2. Kissane DW, Clarke DM, Street AF. Demoraliza- tion syndromeea relevant psychiatric diagnosis for palliative care. J Palliat Care 2001;17:12e21.
  3. Strang P, Strang S, Hultborn R, Arner S. Exis- tential painean entity, a provocation, or a challenge? J Pain Symptom Manage 2004;27:241e250.
  4. Mehnert A, M€ uller D, Lehmann C, Koch U. [The German version of the NCCN Distress Thermometer: validation of a screening instrument for assessment of psychosocial distress in cancer patients]. Z Psychiatr Psychol Psychother 2006;54:213e223.
  5. Reker GT. Manual of the Life Attitude Profile- Revised (LAP-R). Peterborough, UK: Student Psy- chologist Press, 1992.
  6. Zimmermann C, Burman D, Swami N, et al. De- terminants of quality of life in patients with ad- vanced cancer. Support Care Cancer 2011;19: 621e629.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Mehnert, A., Vehling, S., Höcker, A., Lehmann, C., & Koch, U.
Affiliations
University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf (DE)
Corresponding author
Mehnert, Anja
Venue
Journal of Pain and Symptom Management
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2011-11
Volume
42
Issue
5
Pages
768-776
ISSN
0885-3924 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1999136028
Cited by
171
References
29
Citations by year
2026: 11 · 2025: 11 · 2024: 16 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 13 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 10 · 2019: 15 · 2018: 12 · 2017: 11 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 9 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 20 · 2012: 4
FWCI
4.89
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Pain and Symptom Management (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • Barbara and Michael Hell Stiftung Hamburg and German Cancer Aid
  • Fritz und Hildegard Berg-Stiftung
  • Stiftung Wissenschaft Hamburg
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Cancer survivorship and care
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Palliative and Oncologic Care
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Palliative Care and End-of-Life Issues
Keywords
demoralization, Demoralization Scale, advanced cancer, depression, anxiety, existential suffering, psychometric validation, German adaptation, meaninglessness, dysphoria, sense of failure, cancer patients
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Depression, Factor Analysis, Statistical, Female, Germany, Humans, Language, Male, Middle Aged, Neoplasms, Neuropsychological Tests, Psychometrics, Socioeconomic Factors, Stress, Psychological, Reproducibility of Results, Young Adult, Sense of Coherence

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