Cited by 195Suicide and Self-Harm StudiesCancer survivorship and carePalliative and Oncologic Care

Better Off Dead: Suicidal Thoughts in Cancer Patients

Walker, Jane, Waters, Rachel A., Murray, Gordon, Swanson, Helen, Hibberd, Carina J., Rush, Robert W., Storey, Dawn J., Strong, Vanessa A. +3 more·2008·Journal of Clinical Oncology

Abstract

Purpose: Cancer is associated with an increased risk of suicide and attempted suicide. However, we do not know how many cancer patients have thoughts that they would be better off dead or thoughts of hurting themselves. This study aimed to determine the prevalence of such thoughts in cancer outpatients and which patients are most likely to have them. Patients and Methods: A survey of consecutive patients who attended the outpatient clinics of a regional cancer center in Edinburgh, United Kingdom. Patients completed the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9), which included Item 9 that asks patients if they have had thoughts of being better off dead or of hurting themselves in some way in the previous 2 weeks. Those who reported having had such thoughts for at least several days in this period were labeled as positive responders. Patients also completed the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) and a pain scale. The participating patients’ cancer diagnoses and treatments were obtained from the cancer center clinical database. Results: Data were available on 2,924 patients; 7.8% (229 of 2,924; 95% CI, 6.9% to 8.9%) were positive responders. Clinically significant emotional distress, substantial pain, and—to a lesser extent—older age, were associated with a positive response. There was strong evidence of interactions between these effects, and emotional distress played the most important role. Conclusion: A substantial number of cancer outpatients report thoughts that they would be better off dead or thoughts of hurting themselves. Management of emotional distress and pain should be a central aspect of cancer care.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1200/jco.2007.11.8844

Cites

46 of 46 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Walker, J., Waters, R. A., Murray, G., Swanson, H., Hibberd, C. J., Rush, R. W., Storey, D. J., Strong, V. A., Fallon, M. T., Wall, L. R., & Sharpe, M.
Affiliations
Edinburgh Cancer Research (GB)
Venue
Journal of Clinical Oncology
Published
2008-10-10
Volume
26
Issue
29
Pages
4725-4730
ISSN
  • 0732-183X (ISSN-L)
  • 1527-7755
OpenAlex
W2015182459
Cited by
195
References
46
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 20 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 16 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 12 · 2017: 9 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 12 · 2013: 15 · 2012: 7
FWCI
15.62
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Clinical Oncology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Queen Margaret University Publications Repository (Queen Margaret University) (acceptedVersion)
  • Queen Margaret University Publications Repository (Queen Margaret University) (submittedVersion)
Funders
Cancer Research UK
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Suicide and Self-Harm Studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Cancer survivorship and care
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Palliative and Oncologic Care
Keywords
suicidal ideation, cancer patients, suicide risk, emotional distress, pain, depression, anxiety, cancer outpatients, prevalence, risk factors, cancer care
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Attitude to Death, Cross-Sectional Studies, Female, United Kingdom, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Neoplasms, Outpatients, Suicide, Thinking, Prevalence

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