CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 288Cancer survivorship and careCancer-related cognitive impairment studiesFrailty in Older Adults

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 170 of the 170 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Prevalence of Fatigue in Patients With Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Open access
Al Maqbali, Mohammed, Al Sinani, Mohammed, Al Naamani, Zakariya, Al Badi, Khalid, Tanash, Mu'ath Ibrahim·2021·Journal of Pain and Symptom Management
DOI 10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2020.07.037
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Context Fatigue is a particularly common and troubling symptom that has a negative impact on quality of life throughout all phases of treatment and stages of the illness among patients with cancer.Objectives The objective of this meta-analysis is to examine the present status of fatigue prevalence in patients with cancer.Methods The following databases were searched: PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, Cochrane Library, from inception up to February 2020. Prevalence rates were pooled with meta-analysis using a random-effects model. Heterogeneity was tested using I-squared (I 2) statistics.Results A total of 129 studies (N = 71,568) published between 1993 and 2020 met the inclusion criteria. The overall prevalence of fatigue was 49% (34,947 of 71,656 participants, 95% CI = 45-53) with significant heterogeneity between studies (P < 0.000; τ 2 = 0.0000; I 2 = 98.88%). Subgroup analyses show that the prevalence of fatigue related to type of cancer ranged from 26.2% in patients with gynecological cancer to 56.3% in studies that included mixed types of cancer. In advanced cancer stage patients, the highest prevalence of fatigue (60.6%) was reported. Fatigue prevalence rates were 62% during treatment and 51% during mixed treatment status. The prevalence of fatigue decreased from 64% in studies published from 1996 to 2000 to 43% in studies published from 2016 to 2020. Metaregression identified female gender as a significant moderator for higher prevalence of fatigue, whereas mean age is not associated with fatigue.Conclusion This meta-analysis highlights the importance of developing optimal monitoring strategies to reduce fatigue and improve the quality of life of patients with cancer.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2020.07.037

Cites

170 of 170 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Verification

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?

Citations

Cites

Show all 170 references

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 201–287 of 287

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Al Maqbali, M., Al Sinani, M., Al Naamani, Z., Al Badi, K., & Tanash, M. I.
Affiliations
Hashemite University (JO)
ORCID
Venue
Journal of Pain and Symptom Management
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2021-01
Volume
61
Issue
1
Pages
167-189.e14
ISSN
0885-3924 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2020.07.037
OpenAlex
W3047104495
Cited by
288
References
170
Citations by year
2026: 55 · 2025: 65 · 2024: 67 · 2023: 49 · 2022: 35 · 2021: 17
FWCI
2.71
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Journal of Pain and Symptom Management (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Research Portal (Queen's University Belfast) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Cancer survivorship and care
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Cancer-related cognitive impairment studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Geriatrics and Gerontology › Frailty in Older Adults
Keywords
cancer-related fatigue, fatigue prevalence, cancer patients, advanced cancer, cancer therapy, gynecologic cancer, gender differences, quality of life, symptom monitoring
MeSH terms
Fatigue, Female, Humans, Neoplasms, Quality of Life, Prevalence

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