Perceptions of patients' self-efficacy for managing pain and lung cancer symptoms correspondence between patients and family caregivers
Abstract
This study examined the degree of correspondence between lung cancer patients and their family caregivers in their perceptions of the patients' self-efficacy for managing pain and other symptoms of lung cancer, and the association of this correspondence to demographic, disease, and psychosocial variables. Thirty patients who were newly diagnosed with lung cancer and their primary family caregivers completed telephone interviews assessing the patient's symptoms, the patient's self-efficacy for managing symptoms, the quality of the relationship between the patient and caregiver, patient and caregiver psychological distress, and caregiver strain. Although patients and their caregivers showed a moderate degree of agreement in their perceptions of the patient's self-efficacy for managing pain and other symptoms, there was considerable variability in the degree of congruence. Factors that contributed to lower levels of congruence included low patient-rated self-efficacy, female gender of the patient, high patient psychological distress, and high caregiver strain. Caregivers were about evenly split in their tendency to overestimate versus underestimate the patient's self-efficacy. A poorer quality of relationship between the caregiver and the patient (as rated by the patient), high levels of patient-rated symptoms, and high levels of caregiver strain were associated with caregivers overestimating patient self-efficacy.
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?
In a study of 30 patients with lung cancer, there was considerable discordance between ratings of patient self-efficacy provided by patients and those provided by caregivers.
“The results revealed that there was considerable discordance between ratings of patient self-efficacy provided by patients and those provided by caregivers.”
From Psychological aspects of persistent pain: Current state of the science (2004) · cites this paper as [96]
In that study, when caregivers overestimated the patient's self-efficacy, the caregiver reported much higher caregiver strain, and the patient was much more likely to report high levels of pain, other symptoms, and a poorer quality of relationship with the caregiver.
“When caregivers overestimated the patient's self-efficacy, the caregiver reported much higher caregiver strain, and the patient was much more likely to report high levels of pain, other symptoms, and a poorer quality of relationship with the caregiver.”
From Psychological aspects of persistent pain: Current state of the science (2004) · cites this paper as [96]
When there is a large discordance between patient and caregiver perceptions about the patient's self-efficacy, both patient and caregiver might be coping more poorly.
“when there is a large discordance between patient and caregiver perceptions about the patient's self-efficacy, both patient and caregiver might be coping more poorly.”
From Psychological aspects of persistent pain: Current state of the science (2004) · cites this paper as [96]
Patients' perceptions of their own self-efficacy in pain management might not always be shared by others.
“These results suggest that patients' perceptions of their own self-efficacy in pain management might not always be shared by others”
From Psychological aspects of persistent pain: Current state of the science (2004) · cites this paper as [96]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 35 · Cited by 102
- Authors
- Porter, L. S., Keefe, F. J., McBride, C. M., Pollak, K., Fish, L., & Garst, J.
- Affiliations
- University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (US)
- Duke Medical Center (US)
- Corresponding author
- Porter, Laura S.
- Venue
- Pain
- Published
- 2002-07
- Volume
- 98
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 169-178
- ISSN
- 0304-3959 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2032458430
- Cited by
- 102
- References
- 35
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 2 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 14 · 2013: 5 · 2012: 9
- FWCI
- 2.08
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Pain (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- National Institutes of Health (1r21ca088049-01, 5r01ca076945-05)
- National Cancer Institute (P01 CA 72099, R01 CA 76945, R21-CA-88049-01, P01CA072099)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Cancer survivorship and care
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › Pharmacy › Nursing care and research
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine › Pain Management and Opioid Use
- Keywords
- lung cancer, self-efficacy, symptom management, family caregivers, caregiver burden, psychological distress, caregiver-patient relationship, symptom burden, gender differences
- MeSH terms
- Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Family, Female, Humans, Lung Neoplasms, Male, Middle Aged, Pain, Palliative Care, Patients, Self Care, Self Concept, Severity of Illness Index, Caregivers, Pain Management
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