Implementation of NCCN Distress Management Guidelines by Member Institutions
Open accessAbstract
Up to half of all adults with cancer experience clinically significant psychological distress and much of this distress goes unrecognized and untreated. As part of an effort to improve the care of cancer patients, the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) has developed clinical practice guidelines for distress management that include recommendations about the evaluation and treatment of distress. These authors conducted a study to evaluate the implementation of these distress management guidelines by NCCN member institutions. The NCCN member institutions that treat adults were asked in April and May 2005 to describe their distress management practices, and 15 (83%) provided responses. Of these, 8 (53%) conduct routine distress screening for at least some patient groups, with 4 additional institutions (27%) pilot-testing screening strategies. However, only 20% of surveyed member institutions screened all patients as the guidelines recommend. In addition, whether institutions that conduct routine distress screening do so through standardized assessment methods is unclear, because 37.5% of institutions that conduct screening rely only on interviews to identify distressed patients. Findings suggest that most institutions consider screening patients' mental health concerns important and worthwhile, but that greater implementation of guideline recommendations is needed.
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
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?
Routine screening for distress is not carried out in most cancer care settings.
“Routine screening for distress is not carried out in most cancer care settings [8].”
From Psychological intervention targeting distress for cancer patients: a meta-analytic study investigating uptake and adherence. (2016) · cites this paper as [8]
The Results report that 8 of 15 responding NCCN institutions (53%) routinely screened at least some patients, so the paper does not show that most surveyed institutions carried out no routine screening. The Discussion reports that only 20% screened all patients; the claim would be supported if it specified universal screening, but it also generalizes beyond the NCCN institutions surveyed. (LLM, conf=0.84)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 16 · Cited by 198
- Authors
- Jacobsen, P. B., & Ransom, S.
- Affiliations
- Brigham Young University–Hawaii (US)
- ORCID
- Jacobsen, Paul B.
- Venue
- Journal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network
- Publisher
- Harborside Press, LLC
- Published
- 2007-01
- Volume
- 5
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 99-103
- ISSN
- 1540-1405 (ISSN-L)
- 1540-1413
- OpenAlex
- W2138020378
- Cited by
- 198
- References
- 16
- Citations by year
- 2026: 4 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 10 · 2015: 12 · 2014: 14 · 2013: 23 · 2012: 20
- FWCI
- 5.72
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- Journal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Digital Commons - University of South Florida (University of South Florida) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Cancer survivorship and care
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Policy Implementation Science
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Patient-Provider Communication in Healthcare
- Keywords
- cancer-related distress, psychological distress, distress screening, NCCN guidelines, guideline implementation, mental health assessment, quality of cancer care
- MeSH terms
- Humans, Mental Health, Stress, Psychological, Practice Guidelines as Topic, Guideline Adherence
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