CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 289Cancer survivorship and carePain Management and Opioid UsePalliative and Oncologic Care

Symptoms in Adults with Lung Cancer

Open access
Cooley, Mary E·2000·Journal of Pain and Symptom Management
DOI 10.1016/s0885-3924(99)00150-5
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Health care providers play a key role in providing adequate symptom management and promoting quality of life during chronic illness. Several studies have noted that adults with lung cancer experience more symptom distress than patients with other types of cancer. Therefore, symptom management in this group of patients is particularly important. An understanding of the research conducted in this area is important for further knowledge development and for potentially improving symptom management. This paper presents a systematic review of empirical studies examining symptoms in adults with lung cancer. The results of this systematic review revealed that although major strides have been made in understanding symptoms associated with lung cancer, further progress is needed to decrease the morbidity associated with uncontrolled symptoms. Theoretical, conceptual, and/or methodological issues identified through this review must be addressed in future research. In particular, the researcher should provide information about the theoretical or empirical framework guiding the study, give an explicit definition about the dimensions of the symptom experience being studied, report refusal rates and attrition, and use instruments that are reliable and valid.

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/s0885-3924(99)00150-5

Cites

101 of 101 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?

  • Patients receiving treatment for advanced LC frequently report significant symptom burdens, such as diminished physical functioning, shortness of breath, and pain.

    “Patients receiving treatment for advanced LC frequently report significant symptom burdens, such as diminished physical functioning, shortness of breath, and pain.4”

    From Multisite Randomized Controlled Trial of CareSTEPS: A Supportive Care Intervention for the Family Caregivers of Patients With Advanced Lung Cancer (2024) · cites this paper as [4]

    The “Symptoms in Lung Cancer” section reports a high prevalence of uncontrolled symptoms in advanced lung cancer, with pain and dyspnea among the most common and intense. The review also describes symptoms in patients receiving chemotherapy or radiotherapy (“Sample”), but it does not establish diminished physical functioning as a frequently reported symptom in that treatment group; “Methodological Issues” treats functional status as distinct from physical symptoms. Page numbers are unavailable in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.85)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

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

8 of the 109 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 18

  1. Landis SH, Murray T, Bolden S, Wingo P. Can- cer statistics, 1999. CA Cancer J Clin 1998;49:8-31.
  2. Douglas IS, White SR. Con-Therapeutic em- piricism: the case against chemotherapy in nonsmall cell lung cancer. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 1995; 151:1288-1291.
  3. Kaasa S, Mastekaasa A, Thorud E. Toxicity, phys- ical function, and everyday activity reported by pa- tients with inoperable nonsmall cell lung cancer in a randomized clinical trial (chemotherapy versus ra- diotherapy). Acta Oncol 1988;27:343-349.
  4. Krech RL, Davis J, Walsh D, Curtis EB. Symp- toms of lung cancer. Palliat Med 1992;6:309-315.
  5. Hollen PJ, Gralla RJ, Kris MG, Cox C, Belani CP, Grunberg SM, Crawford J, Neidhart JA. Measure- ment of quality of life in patients with lung cancer in multicenter trials of new therapies. Cancer 1994;73: 2087-2098.
  6. Aaronson NK, Meyerwitz BE, Bloom JR, Fawzy FI, Feldstein M, Fink D, Holland JC, Johnson JE, Lowman JT, Patterson WB, Ware JE. Quality of life research in oncology: past achievements and future priorities. Cancer 1991;67:839-843.
  7. Teel CS, Meek P, McNamara AM, Watson L. Per- spectives unifying symptom interpretation. Image 1997;29:175-182.
  8. McDaniel RW, Rhodes VA. Symptom experi- ence. Semin Oncol Nurs 1995;11:232-234.
  9. Giardino ER, Wolf ZR. Symptoms: evidence and experience. Holistic Nurse Pract 1993;7:1-12.
  10. Nayfield SG, Hailey BJ, McCabe M. Quality of life assessment in cancer clinical trials. Report of the workshop on quality of life research in cancer clinical trials, July 16-17, 1990.
  11. Curran D, Bacchi M, Schmitz S, Molenberghs G, Sylvester RJ. Identifying the types of missingness in quality of life data from clinical trials. Statist Med 1998;17:739-756.
  12. Fairclough DL, Peterson HF, Chang V. Why are missing quality of life data a problem in clinical trials of cancer therapy? Statist Med 1998;17:667-677.
  13. Troxel AB, Fairclough DL, Curran D, Hahn EA. Statistical analysis of quality of life with missing data in cancer clinical trials. Statist Med 1998;17:653-666.
  14. McCorkle R, Packard N, Landenburger K. Sub- ject accrual and attrition: problems and solution. J Psychosoc Oncol 1984;2:137-146.
  15. Bernhard J, Cella DF, Coates AS, Fallowfield L, Ganz PA, Moinpour CM, Mosconi P, Osoba D, Simes J, Hurny C. Missing quality of life data in cancer clin- ical trials: serious problems and challenges. Statist Med 1998;17:517-532.
  16. Simes RJ, Greatorex V, Gebski VJ. Practical ap- proaches to minimize problems with missing quality of life data. Statist Med 1998;17:725-737.
  17. Rubenstein LZ. Geriatric assessment: an over- view of its import. Clin Geriatr Med 1987;3:1.
  18. Hendriksen C, Lund E, Stomgard E. Conse- quences of assessment and intervention among eld- erly people: a three year randomized controlled trial. Br Med J 1984;298:1522.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Cooley, M. E.
Affiliations
University of Pennsylvania (US)
Corresponding author
Cooley, Mary E
ORCID
Cooley, Mary E
Venue
Journal of Pain and Symptom Management
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2000-02
Volume
19
Issue
2
Pages
137-153
ISSN
0885-3924 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/s0885-3924(99)00150-5
OpenAlex
W2073283330
Cited by
288
References
109
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 15 · 2023: 14 · 2022: 18 · 2021: 15 · 2020: 16 · 2019: 14 · 2018: 11 · 2017: 12 · 2016: 9 · 2015: 12 · 2014: 12 · 2013: 13 · 2012: 13
FWCI
0.44
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Journal of Pain and Symptom Management (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • American Cancer Society
  • Oncology Nursing Foundation
  • National Institute of Nursing Research (T32 NR07035)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Cancer survivorship and care
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine › Pain Management and Opioid Use
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Palliative and Oncologic Care
Keywords
lung cancer, cancer symptoms, symptom management, symptom distress, quality of life, chronic disease, reporting quality
MeSH terms
Adult, Humans, Lung Neoplasms, Morbidity, Quality of Life

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