The DOI matches its Crossref record; 66 of the 66 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Conceptualizing prognostic awareness in advanced cancer: A systematic review
Abstract
This systematic review synthesizes the complex literature on prognostic awareness in cancer. A total of 37 studies examining cancer patients’ understanding of their prognosis were included. Prognostic awareness definitions and assessment methods were inconsistent across studies. A surprisingly high percentage of patients (up to 75%) were unaware of their poor prognosis, and in several studies, even their cancer diagnosis (up to 96%), particularly in studies conducted outside of North America. This review highlights surprisingly low rates of prognostic awareness in patients with advanced cancer as well as discrepancies in prognostic awareness assessment, suggesting the need for empirically validated measures of prognostic awareness.
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
“Applebaum and colleagues found that most studies simply asked patients with terminal illness whether they perceived the illness to be terminal or curable, or if the goal of treatment was palliative or curative.2”
From Measuring a Patient's understanding of their prognosis: An exploratory analysis (2022) · cites this paper as [2]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredIn the citing paper
“Additionally, given that many cancer patients do not have an accurate perception of their disease stage (Applebaum et al., 2014), stage of cancer as identified from medical charts might not be an appropriate proxy variable for patients’ understanding of their prognosis.”
From The relationship between acceptance of cancer and distress: A meta-analytic review (2019) · cites this paper as Applebaum et al., 2014
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
Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: the PRISMA statement
Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., Altman, D. G., & for the PRISMA Group (2009) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.b2535 · Cited by 83,823
Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA Statement.
(2009) · PubMed Central · Cited by 44,859
(1990) · Cited by 24,217
Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement
Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., & Altman, D. G. (2009) · Journal of Clinical Epidemiology · doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2009.06.005 · Cited by 19,575
Qualitative evaluation and research methods
Ellis, D. J. (1990) · International Journal of Information Management · doi:10.1016/0268-4012(90)90041-p · Cited by 17,943
Research methods in anthropology: qualitative and quantitative approaches
(2002) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.39-4047 · Cited by 5,622
The Brief Illness Perception Questionnaire
Broadbent, E., Petrie, K. J., Main, J., & Weinman, J. (2006) · Journal of Psychosomatic Research · doi:10.1016/j.jpsychores.2005.10.020 · Cited by 3,431
Wright, A. A. (2008) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.300.14.1665 · Cited by 2,788
BİLGEN, M. S., Bilgen, Ö. F., ahmed, Ç. I., Kara, H., mutlu, M., & Yaray, O. (2022) · Singapore Medical Journal · doi:10.11622/smedj · Cited by 1,730
Relationship between cancer patients' predictions of prognosis and their treatment preferences
Weeks, J. C. (1998) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.279.21.1709 · Cited by 1,319
Research works printed but not linked: 1
- Christakis N, 1999, Daedalus, 128, 197
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Optimism, social support, and mental health outcomes in patients with advanced cancer
Applebaum, A. J., Stein, E. M., Lord‐Bessen, J., Pessin, H., Rosenfeld, B. D., & BREITBART, W. S. (2013) · Psycho-Oncology · doi:10.1002/pon.3418 · Cited by 259
Self-citationChen, C. H., Kuo, S. C., & Tang, S. T. (2017) · Palliative Medicine · doi:10.1177/0269216316663976 · Cited by 146
The relationship between acceptance of cancer and distress: A meta-analytic review
Secinti, E., Tometich, D. B., Johns, S. A., & Mosher, C. E. (2019) · Clinical Psychology Review · doi:10.1016/j.cpr.2019.05.001 · Cited by 132
“However, up to 75% of cancer patients do not have an accurate understanding of their disease stage or prognosis (Applebaum et al., 2014), which may, in part, reflect a lack of acceptance.”
BackgroundAdvance Care Planning in Serious Illness: A Narrative Review
Rosa, W. E., Izumi, S., Sullivan, D. R., Lakin, J. R., Rosenberg, A. R., Creutzfeldt, C. J., Lafond, D., Tjia, J., Cotter, V. T., Wallace, C. L., et al. (2022) · Journal of Pain and Symptom Management · doi:10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2022.08.012 · Cited by 129
Existential distress among caregivers of patients with brain tumors: a review of the literature
Applebaum, A. J., Kryza‐Lacombe, M., Buthorn, J. J., DeRosa, A. P., Corner, G., & Diamond, E. L. (2015) · Neuro-Oncology Practice · doi:10.1093/nop/npv060 · Cited by 111
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Applebaum, A. J., Kolva, E. A., Kulikowski, J. R., Jacobs, J. D., DeRosa, A., Lichtenthal, W. G., Olden, M. E., Rosenfeld, B., & Breitbart, W.
- Affiliations
- Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center (US)
- Fordham University (US)
- Weill Cornell Medicine (US)
- ORCID
- Venue
- Journal of Health Psychology
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2013-10-24
- Volume
- 19
- Issue
- 9
- Pages
- 1103-1119
- ISSN
- 1359-1053 (ISSN-L)
- 1461-7277
- PMC
- PMC4665620
- OpenAlex
- W2100410564
- Cited by
- 145
- References
- 66
- Citations by year
- 2026: 11 · 2025: 15 · 2024: 14 · 2023: 19 · 2022: 13 · 2021: 14 · 2020: 12 · 2019: 13 · 2018: 12 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 1
- FWCI
- 0.71
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of Health Psychology (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- National Cancer Institute (NCI T32CA009461-28, R01CA128187, K07CA172216, P30CA008748, T32CA009461)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Palliative Care and End-of-Life Issues
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Patient-Provider Communication in Healthcare
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Palliative and Oncologic Care
- Keywords
- prognostic awareness, advanced cancer, prognosis understanding, psychometric measures, end-of-life care
- MeSH terms
- Awareness, Humans, Neoplasms, Prognosis
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
