Cited by 93Cancer survivorship and carePatient-Provider Communication in HealthcareCancer-related cognitive impairment studies

Screening for cancer-related distress: Summary of evidence from tools to programmes

Open access
Bidstrup, Pernille Envold, Johansen, Christoffer, Mitchell, Alex J.·2011·Acta Oncologica

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: A number of studies have addressed the development and testing of tools for measuring cancer-related distress. Except for studies of diagnostic validity, knowledge on the effect of screening for psychological distress on psychological well-being is limited. We aimed to describe and critically discuss the findings of randomized trials of the effect of screening and to identify components necessary for future studies of the effectiveness of screening programmes. METHODS: A search was made of the Embase/Medline and Web of Knowledge abstract databases from inception to September 2010. Our inclusion criterion was randomized controlled trials concerning the effect of screening for psychological distress on psychological outcomes. We compared the randomized trials on the following aspects: design and methods, setting and sample, screening and intervention, effects on psychological distress, staff utilization of screening results, possible confounding factors and other methodological limitations. RESULTS: Of the seven identified randomized trials of the effect of screening for psychological distress, three showed an effect on psychological well-being, one showed an effect only among patients depressed at baseline, and three studies showed no effect. Several of the trials had methodological weaknesses and they were heterogeneous in design and content making direct comparisons difficult. DISCUSSION: Future randomized trials are needed to examine comparative validity of different screening approaches and to evaluate the benefits of screening linked with associated treatment. Trials should include distress as a patient outcome, use appropriate samples, include a detailed, theory-based distress management plan, offer staff training and ideally track staff and patient use of subsequent interventions. Provisional work suggests that screening for psychological distress holds promise and is often clinically valuable, but it is too early to conclude definitively that psychological screening itself affects the psychological well-being of cancer patients.

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 · 10.3109/0284186x.2010.533192

Cites

44 of 44 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

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?

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

Research works printed but not linked: 5

  1. [6]6. of distress thermometer and other ultra-short methods of detecting cancer-related mood disorders. J Clin Oncol 2007; 25:4670 -81.
  2. [42]42. A review and diagnostic validity meta-analysis. J Natl Compr Canc Netw 2010;8:487 -94.
  3. [45]45. Chang VT, Hwang SS, Feuerman M. Validation of the [34] Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale. Cancer 2000;88: 2164 -71.
  4. [54]54. numeric rating scale to measure cancer pain intensity. Cancer Nurs 1997;20:88 -93.
  5. [56]56. detect depression in cancer and palliative care? A Bayesian meta-analysis. Br J Cancer 2008;98:1934 -43.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Bidstrup, P. E., Johansen, C., & Mitchell, A. J.
Affiliations
  • Danish Cancer Society (DK)
  • University of Southern Denmark (DK)
  • University of Leicester (GB)
Corresponding author
Bidstrup, Pernille Envold
Venue
Acta Oncologica
Published
2011-01-13
Volume
50
Issue
2
Pages
194-204
ISSN
  • 0284-186X (ISSN-L)
  • 1651-226X
OpenAlex
W2059527885
Cited by
93
References
44
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 8 · 2013: 14 · 2012: 13
FWCI
6.45
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Acta Oncologica (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • University of Southern Denmark Research Portal (University of Southern Denmark) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Cancer survivorship and care
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Patient-Provider Communication in Healthcare
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine › Cancer-related cognitive impairment studies
Keywords
cancer-related distress, psychological distress screening, screening programs, psychological well-being, cancer patients, screening effectiveness, depression, distress management, employee training
MeSH terms
Depression, Humans, Mass Screening, National Health Programs, Neoplasms, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic, Evidence-Based Practice, Translational Research, Biomedical

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