The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The Physical Health of Patients With Advanced Pancreatic Cancer and the Psychological Health of Their Family Caregivers When Newly Enrolled in Hospice
Open accessAbstract
With virtually no early detection methods and limited treatment options, pancreatic cancer is a deadly form of cancer, presenting significant symptoms and a compressed illness trajectory affecting not only the patients but also their family caregivers. The purpose of this study was to describe the most commonly occurring symptoms and level of associated distress of patients with advanced pancreatic cancer as well as the perceived social support, perceived health, and depressive symptoms of their family caregiver when newly enrolled in hospice. The study was descriptive in design, and the sample consisted of 64 patients with advanced pancreatic cancer and their family caregivers, who were newly enrolled in hospice. The results showed that 50% or more of the patients with advanced pancreatic cancer suffer from symptoms of fatigue, lack of appetite, dry mouth, pain, feeling drowsy, and feeling sad. Of those symptoms, the ones causing the patients the most distress were fatigue, pain, and having no appetite. In measuring perceived social support, caregivers were most satisfied with emotional support and rated their perceived health as fair to good with relatively low depressive symptoms. Further research is needed regarding the effectiveness of hospice care on the assessment and management of intractable symptoms experienced by patients with advanced pancreatic cancer. Caregivers’ perceptions of social support may be related to their perceived health and low depressive symptoms upon enrollment in hospice, but further research of these relationships is warranted as well as the impact of patients’ physical health on caregivers’ health.
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.
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?
The source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Five studies (three qualitative, two quantitative) were conducted in the USA [5, 28, 29, 31, 33], three (two qualitative, one quantitative) in Australia [27, 30, 32] and one quantitative study in Denmark [6].”
From Systematic review of caregiver burden, unmet needs and quality-of-life among informal caregivers of patients with pancreatic cancer (2023) · cites this paper as [33]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Informal caregivers were predominantly spouses to patients with pancreatic cancer (98.6%, 6058/6142) [5, 6, 28, 33, 34].”
From Systematic review of caregiver burden, unmet needs and quality-of-life among informal caregivers of patients with pancreatic cancer (2023) · cites this paper as [33]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Eight studies were cross-sectional studies [5, 27–33]. One study was a prospective cohort design [6].”
From Systematic review of caregiver burden, unmet needs and quality-of-life among informal caregivers of patients with pancreatic cancer (2023) · cites this paper as [33]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Data was collected through questionnaires alone in four studies [5, 32, 33], semi-structured interviews with individual participants in three studies [29–31], focus groups in two studies [27, 28] and questionnaire and semi-structured interview together in one study [29].”
From Systematic review of caregiver burden, unmet needs and quality-of-life among informal caregivers of patients with pancreatic cancer (2023) · cites this paper as [33]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“The cross-sectional design of the three studies meant they scored 0 points on items assessing duration of follow-up and loss of participants [5, 32, 33].”
From Systematic review of caregiver burden, unmet needs and quality-of-life among informal caregivers of patients with pancreatic cancer (2023) · cites this paper as [33]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Four studies provided quantitative data on quality-of-life of informal caregivers [5, 6, 32, 33]. No studies provided qualitative data on quality-of-life of informal caregivers.”
From Systematic review of caregiver burden, unmet needs and quality-of-life among informal caregivers of patients with pancreatic cancer (2023) · cites this paper as [33]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“However, 32% of the study population reported a score of 4 and above which is indicative of clinical depression [33].”
From Systematic review of caregiver burden, unmet needs and quality-of-life among informal caregivers of patients with pancreatic cancer (2023) · cites this paper as [33]
The check wasn’t confident either way, so it gives no verdict — never disputed.
In the citing paper
“All four studies scored 0 points for the item assessing prospective calculation of study size [5, 6, 32, 33].”
From Systematic review of caregiver burden, unmet needs and quality-of-life among informal caregivers of patients with pancreatic cancer (2023) · cites this paper as [33]
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.
Citations
Cites
Lewinsohn, P. M., Seeley, J. R., Roberts, R. E., & Allen, N. B. (1997) · Psychology and Aging · doi:10.1037/0882-7974.12.2.277 · Cited by 1,782
Spouses' experience of caregiving for cancer patients: a literature review
Li, Q. P., Mak, Y. W., & Loke, A. Y. (2013) · International Nursing Review · doi:10.1111/inr.12000 · Cited by 209
Adjusting to pancreatic cancer: Perspectives from first-degree relatives
Petrin, K., Bowen, D. J., Alfano, C. M., & Bennett, R. (2009) · Palliative and Supportive Care · doi:10.1017/s1478951509990204 · Cited by 41
Research works printed but not linked: 9
- Pereira, 2011, J Clin Nurs, 20, 2448, 10.1111/j.1365-2702.2010.03644.x · DOI
- So, 2014, BMC Public Health, 14, 362, 10.1186/1471-2458-14-362 · DOI
- Moore, 2014, Soc Sci Med, 116, 102, 10.1016/j.socscimed.2014.06.038 · DOI
- Krause, 1995, Gerontologist, 35, 498, 10.1093/geront/35.4.498 · DOI
- Jang, 2002, J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci, 57, M466, 10.1093/gerona/57.7.M466 · DOI
- Radloff, 1997, Appl Psychol Meas, 1, 385, 10.1177/014662167700100306 · DOI · Paper page
- Irwin, 1999, Arch Intern Med, 159, 1701, 10.1001/archinte.159.15.1701 · DOI
- Sherman, &NA;, New York:, 2014, 147
- Hermanns, 2012, Qual Rep, 17975, 1
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Chong, E., Crowe, L., Mentor, K., Pandanaboyana, S., & Sharp, L. (2023) · Supportive Care in Cancer · doi:10.1007/s00520-022-07468-7 · Cited by 86
“Eight studies were cross-sectional studies [5, 27–33].”
Influential
Metadata
- Authors
- Sherman, D. W., & McMillan, S. C.
- Affiliations
- Florida International University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Sherman, Deborah Witt
- Venue
- Journal of Hospice & Palliative Nursing
- Published
- 2015
- Volume
- 17
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 235-241
- ISSN
- 1522-2179 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC4657749
- OpenAlex
- W2316167337
- Cited by
- 14
- References
- 3
- Citations by year
- 2025: 3 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 2
- FWCI
- 0.71
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
- Locations
- Journal of Hospice and Palliative Nursing (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
- Funders
- National Cancer Institute (R01CA077307)
- National Institute of Nursing Research (R01NR008252)
- Topics
- 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
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Cancer survivorship and care
- Keywords
- advanced pancreatic cancer, hospice care, family caregivers, caregiver mental health, perceived social support, depressive symptoms, health perception, fatigue, pain, appetite loss, symptom distress
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
