Cited by 55Cancer survivorship and careNursing care and researchFamily Caregiving in Mental Illness

Systematic review and meta-analysis of prevalence of depression among caregivers of cancer patients

Open access
Pan, Yuan-Chien, Lin, Yaw-Sheng·2022·Frontiers in Psychiatry

Abstract

Background: Caregivers of cancer patients commonly experience depressive symptoms due to the heavy burden of caregiving responsibility. Objective: This meta-analysis examined the prevalence of depression among caregivers of cancer patients. Methods: We included 85 studies covering 23,317 participants published between 2001 and 2021 (25 countries) that reported the prevalence of depression among caregivers of cancer patients. We examined the pooled prevalence of depression and hypothesized moderators, including year, age, sex, geographic regions, percentage of spousal caregivers, depression measures, and cancer stage. Results: All 85 effect sizes included 6,077 caregivers of patients with depression. The weighted average prevalence of depression was 25.14% (95% CI, 21.42–29.27%) among caregivers. The prevalence rates were moderated by geographic region, patients' cancer stage, and measures for depression. The prevalence rates also varied among the different measures assessing depression. The prevalence rate decreased with the mean age of the caregivers and the percentage of spousal caregivers. Conclusions: This study revealed a high prevalence of depression among caregivers of cancer patients. The prevalence rates also varied with the study design, demographics of caregivers, and patients' medical information. These findings highlight that psychological support and intervention may be crucial for patients and their caregivers in clinical practice.

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 · 10.3389/fpsyt.2022.817936

Cites

120 of 120 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

1 retracted

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Pan, Y.-C., & Lin, Y.-S.
Affiliations
National Taiwan University (TW)
Corresponding author
Lin, Yaw-Sheng
Venue
Frontiers in Psychiatry
Published
2022-05-12
Volume
13
Pages
817936-817936
ISSN
1664-0640 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4280603040
Cited by
52
References
120
Citations by year
2026: 24 · 2025: 15 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 6
FWCI
0.86
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Frontiers in Psychiatry (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
Funders
Ministry of Science and Technology, Taiwan (119-MY3, MOST107-2410-H002-119-MY3, MOST 107?, 2410-H-002)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Cancer survivorship and care
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Pharmacy › Nursing care and research
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Family Caregiving in Mental Illness
Keywords
caregiver depression, cancer caregivers, depression prevalence, spousal caregivers, caregiver burden, tumor stage, depression measurement, psychological support for caregivers

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