Cited by 70Nursing care and researchPalliative Care and End-of-Life IssuesPalliative and Oncologic Care

A Pilot Study of the Experience of Family Caregivers of Patients With Advanced Pancreatic Cancer Using a Mixed Methods Approach

Open access
Sherman, Deborah W., McGuire, Deborah B., Free, David, Cheon, Joo Young·2014·Journal of Pain and Symptom Management

Abstract

Context Pancreatic cancer presents a wide spectrum of significant symptomatology. The high symptom burden, coupled with a rapidly fatal diagnosis, limits preparation or time for adjustment for both patients and their family caregivers. From the initial diagnosis and throughout the illness experience, the physical and emotional demands of caregiving can predispose caregivers themselves to illness and a greater risk of mortality. Understanding the negative and positive aspects of caregiving for patients with advanced pancreatic cancer will inform interventions that promote positive caregiver outcomes and support caregivers in their role. Objectives To provide feasibility data for a larger, mixed methods, longitudinal study focused on the experience of family caregivers of patients with advanced pancreatic cancer and preliminary qualitative data to substantiate the significance of studying this caregiver population. Methods This was a mixed methods study guided by the Stress Process Model. Eight family caregivers of patients with advanced pancreatic cancer from oncology practices of a university-affiliated medical center were surveyed. Results The pilot results supported the ability to recruit and retain participants and informed recruitment and data collection procedures. The qualitative results provided preliminary insights into caregiver experiences during the diagnosis and treatment phases. Key findings that substantiated the significance of studying these caregivers include…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2013.09.006

Cites

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, 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?

No citation lists for this paper

No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.

References 44 · Cited by 70

Authors
Sherman, D. W., McGuire, D. B., Free, D., & Cheon, J. Y.
Affiliations
  • University of Maryland, Baltimore (US)
  • Mount Sinai Beth Israel (US)
Corresponding author
Sherman, Deborah W.
Venue
Journal of Pain and Symptom Management
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2014-09
Volume
48
Issue
3
Pages
385-399.e2
ISSN
0885-3924 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2145266938
Cited by
70
References
44
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 3
FWCI
3.80
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Pain and Symptom Management (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
University of Maryland
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Pharmacy › Nursing care and research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Palliative Care and End-of-Life Issues
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Palliative and Oncologic Care
Keywords
family caregivers, advanced pancreatic cancer, caregiver experiences, caregiver stress, stress process model, coping strategies, caregiver support interventions
MeSH terms
Adaptation, Psychological, Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Family, Feasibility Studies, Patient Care, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Pancreatic Neoplasms, Pilot Projects, Severity of Illness Index, Stress, Psychological, United States, Caregivers

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