Evidence map›Paper›PMID 19996030›Full record

SynthesisJournal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology2010

Are gold standard depression measures appropriate for use in geriatric cancer patients? A systematic evaluation of self-report depression instruments used with geriatric, cancer, and geriatric cancer samples.

Christian J Nelson, Christina Cho, Alexandra R Berk, Jimmie Holland, Andrew J Roth

Abstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 53 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
53citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
3.2field-weighted citation impact, top 7% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

53 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 126 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. The Difficult Task of Diagnosing Depression in Elderly People with Cancer: A Systematic Review.Clinical practice and epidemiology in mental health : CP & EMH · 2021
    Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Observational
  11. Article
  12. Observational
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Christian J NelsonDept of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, 641 Lexington Ave, 7th floor, New York, NY 10022, USA. nelsonc@mskcc.org
Christina Cho
Alexandra R Berk
Jimmie Holland
Andrew J Roth
Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center · US

Funding

X-RAY CRYSTALLOGRAPHYP30CA008748 · NCI · SLOAN-KETTERING INSTITUTE FOR CANCER RES · PI Nicholas D Socci · 1985 to 2026
$347.4M
NCI NIH HHS P30 CA008748NCI NIH HHS P30 CA08748
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeGeriatric issues in cancer are becoming prominent. Depression is a significant concern for both the elderly and patients with cancer, yet identifying depression in these patients is difficult and often leads to under-recognition. We conducted a systematic review to determine which depression instruments are appropriate for use in geriatric patients with cancer.

methodsWe identified the most commonly used self-report depression instruments. We then used the criteria established in the US Food and Drug Administration Draft Guidance on Patient-Reported Outcome Measures to determine the extent of validation evidence of these measures in geriatric cancer populations. Finally, we determined which instruments captured depressive symptoms that are common among elderly patients with cancer.

resultsEight measures were selected as the most commonly used instruments. These were the Beck Depression Inventory-II, Brief Symptom Inventory-18, Center for Epidemiologic Studies-Depression Scale, Geriatric Depression Scale-15, Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, Patient Health Questionnaire-9, Profile of Mood States-Short Form, and Zung Self-Rating Depression Scale. Many have been validated for use with geriatric adults and patients with cancer; however, data addressing content validity and responder definition were lacking. To date, there is no validation information for geriatric patients with cancer. Furthermore, symptom profile analysis revealed that these measures do not identify many symptoms signaling depression in geriatric patients with cancer.

conclusionThe validation evidence for use of common depression instruments in geriatric patients with cancer is lacking. This, and the possibility that these measures may not assess common depressive symptoms in geriatric patients with cancer, questions the adequacy of these scales in this population.

Indexed as

Geriatric AssessmentPsychiatric Status Rating ScalesAgedDepressionHumansNeoplasmsValidation Studies as Topic

Identifiers

PMID19996030
PMCPMC2815722
OpenAlexW2030851149

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.