The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Psychosocial Status in Chronic Illness: A Comparative Analysis of Six Diagnostic Groups
Abstract
Assumptions that psychological attributes are specific to particular diagnoses characterize many investigations of chronically ill patients. We studied 758 patients, each of whom had one of six different chronic illnesses, to determine and compare their scores on the Mental Health Index. Five groups of physically ill patients (with arthritis, diabetes, cancer, renal disease, or dermatologic disorders) did not differ significantly from one another or from the general public, but all had significantly higher scores for psychological status when compared with the sixth group, patients under treatment for depression. There was a significant direct relation between higher mental-health scores and advancing age across all patient populations. Patients with recently diagnosed illness in all groups had poorer mental-health scores than did patients whose illness had been diagnosed more than four months previously. A direct relation between declining physical status and mental-health scores was observed. These results suggest that psychological adaptation among patients with chronic illnesses is remarkably effective and fundamentally independent of specific diagnosis.
Overview
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
McHorney, C. A., Ware, J. E., Rachel Lu, J. F., & Sherbourne, C. D. (1994) · Medical Care · doi:10.1097/00005650-199401000-00004 · Cited by 4,458
Depression, chronic diseases, and decrements in health: results from the World Health Surveys
Moussavi, S., Chatterji, S., Verdes, E., Tandon, A., Patel, V., & Ustun, B. (2007) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(07)61415-9 · Cited by 4,070
The MOS Short-form General Health Survey: Reliability and Validity in a Patient Population
Stewart, A. L., Hays, R. D., & Ware, J. E. (1988) · Medical Care · doi:10.1097/00005650-198807000-00007 · Cited by 3,339
Health complaints, stress, and distress: Exploring the central role of negative affectivity.
Watson, D., & Pennebaker, J. W. (1989) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.96.2.234 · Cited by 3,030
Posttraumatic growth following breast cancer: a controlled comparison study
Cordova, M. J., Cunningham, L. L. C., Carlson, C. R., & Andrykowski, M. A. (2001) · Health Psychology · doi:10.1037/0278-6133.20.3.176 · Cited by 973
Metadata
- Authors
- Cassileth, B. R., Lusk, E. J., Strouse, T. B., Miller, D. S., Brown, L. L., Cross, P. A., & Tenaglia, A. N.
- Venue
- New England Journal of Medicine
- Publisher
- Massachusetts Medical Society
- Published
- 1984-08-23
- Volume
- 311
- Issue
- 8
- Pages
- 506-511
- ISSN
- 0028-4793 (ISSN-L)
- 1533-4406
- OpenAlex
- W3156620274
- Cited by
- 495
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 25.07
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Psychosocial Status in Chronic Illness: A Comparative Analysis of Six Diagnostic Groups. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1056/nejm198408233110805
- The paper
- Cassileth, B. R., Lusk, E. J., Strouse, T. B., Miller, D. S., Brown, L. L., Cross, P. A., & Tenaglia, A. N. (1984). Psychosocial Status in Chronic Illness: A Comparative Analysis of Six Diagnostic Groups. New England Journal of Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1056/nejm198408233110805
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.