Cited by 7Cancer survivorship and careMindfulness and Compassion InterventionsCOVID-19 and Mental Health

Effect of perceived stress on psychological distress in hepatocellular carcinoma patients undergoing TACE: the mediating role of experiential avoidance and the moderating role of trait mindfulness

Open access
Liu, Zengxia, Li, Min, Jia, Yong, Zheng, Lufang, Chen, Li·2025·BMC Cancer

Published version of a preprint

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to explore the moderated mediation mechanism of the relationships among perceived stress, psychological distress, experiential avoidance and trait mindfulness of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients after transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) in China. METHODS: This study utilized a cross-sectional approach to gather data from 458 HCC patients undergoing TACE. Participants completed self-report measures assessing psychological distress, perceived stress, experiential avoidance and trait mindfulness. Mediation and moderation analyses are carried out in SPSS macro PROCESS. RESULTS: Perceived stress could affect psychological distress and experiential avoidance could mediate this relationship (mediation effect = 0.041, [95%CI=(0.027, 0.056)]). Trait mindfulness played a role as a moderator in the direct and indirect effect of perceived stress on psychological distress. CONCLUSION: Our findings underscore the vital role of experiential avoidance and trait mindfulness to relieve psychological distress, and provide practical implications for mental health intervention programs of HCC patients undergoing TACE.

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 · 10.1186/s12885-025-13679-y

Cites

53 of 53 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

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

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Liu, Z., Li, M., Jia, Y., Zheng, L., & Chen, L.
Affiliations
  • Jilin University (CN)
  • First Hospital of Jilin University (CN)
Corresponding author
Chen, Li
Venue
BMC Cancer
Published
2025-02-13
Volume
25
Issue
1
Pages
254-254
ISSN
1471-2407 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4407529644
Cited by
7
References
53
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 2
FWCI
2.90
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • BMC Cancer (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • Research Square (acceptedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
University Natural Science Research Project of Anhui Province (2023AH050583)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Cancer survivorship and care
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Mindfulness and Compassion Interventions
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › COVID-19 and Mental Health
Keywords
perceived stress, psychological distress, hepatocellular carcinoma, transarterial chemoembolization, experiential avoidance, trait mindfulness, moderated mediation, mental health of cancer patients
MeSH terms
Psychological Distress, Adult, Aged, Avoidance Learning, China, Cross-Sectional Studies, Female, Carcinoma, Hepatocellular, Humans, Liver Neoplasms, Male, Middle Aged, Stress, Psychological, Chemoembolization, Therapeutic, Mindfulness

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