Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25894882›Full record

ArticleSupportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer2015

Burden of spousal caregivers of stage II and III esophageal cancer survivors 3 years after treatment with curative intent.

N Haj Mohammad, A W Walter, M G H van Oijen, M C C M Hulshof, J J G H M Bergman, M C J Anderegg, M I van Berge Henegouwen, I Henselmans, M A G Sprangers, H W M van Laarhoven

Open access · hybridAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
4.3field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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

21 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 49 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Health-related quality of life in esophageal cancer: a state-of-the-art review of patient-reported outcomes and an evidence and gap map.Diseases of the esophagus : official journal of the International Society for Diseases of the Esophagus · 2025
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Experiences and requirements in nutritional management of patients with esophageal cancer: a systematic review and qualitative meta-synthesis.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2023
    Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Experiences of being a family caregiver to a patient treated for oesophageal cancer-1 year after surgery.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2022
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Informal caregiver well-being during and after patients' treatment with adjuvant chemotherapy for colon cancer: a prospective, exploratory study.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2021
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Health-related quality of life in Malaysian gastrointestinal cancer patients and their family caregivers-a comparison study.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2020
    Article
  18. Observational
  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

10 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

N Haj MohammadDepartment of Medical Oncology, Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, F4-222, Meibergdreef 9, PO box 22600, 1100 DD, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. n.hajmohammad@amc.nl.
A W WalterDepartment of Medical Oncology, Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, F4-222, Meibergdreef 9, PO box 22600, 1100 DD, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
M G H van OijenDepartment of Medical Oncology, Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, F4-222, Meibergdreef 9, PO box 22600, 1100 DD, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
M C C M HulshofDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
J J G H M BergmanDepartment of Gastroenterology, Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
M C J AndereggDepartment of Surgery, Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
M I van Berge HenegouwenDepartment of Surgery, Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
I HenselmansDepartment of Medical Psychology, Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
M A G SprangersDepartment of Medical Psychology, Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
H W M van LaarhovenDepartment of Medical Oncology, Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, F4-222, Meibergdreef 9, PO box 22600, 1100 DD, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Academic Medical Center · NLUniversity of Amsterdam · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesThe aim of this study is to examine caregiver burden of spousal caregivers of patients with esophageal cancer after curative treatment with neoadjuvant chemoradiation followed by resection and to assess factors associated with caregiver burden.

methodsIn this exploratory, cross-sectional study, spousal caregivers and patients were eligible if the caregiver was the patient's spouse and the patient had been treated with chemoradiation followed by surgery after esophageal carcinoma diagnosis. Forty-seven couples were included. Spousal caregivers completed a questionnaire, examining caregivers' burden (Self-Perceived Pressure from Informal Care (SPPIC, Dutch)), caregiver unmet needs (SCNS-P&S), anxiety and depression (Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS)), and marital satisfaction (Maudsley Marital Questionnaire (MMQ)). Patients completed the latter two questionnaires and a cancer specific quality of life questionnaire (EORTC-QLQ C30 and OES18 (oesophageal module). Logistic regression analysis was performed to identify correlates for caregiver burden.

resultsThe median time after esophagectomy was 38 months. Thirty-four percent of the spousal caregivers reported moderate or high burden. Spousal caregivers most frequently reported unmet needs were managing concerns about the cancer coming back (43%), dealing with others not acknowledging the impact on your life of caring for a person with cancer (38%), and balancing the needs of the person with cancer and one's own needs. A comparable proportion of spousal caregivers and patients showed symptoms of anxiety (23 vs 17%) and depression (17 vs 17%). Spousal caregivers reported significantly more dissatisfaction than patients on the marital scale (p < 0.01). Factors independently associated with higher caregiver burden were fatigue of the patient (OR = 1.66, 95% CI 1.12-2.47) and depression of the spousal caregiver (OR = 1.44, 95% CI 1.11-1.86).

conclusionsMore than a third of the spousal caregivers of patients with esophageal cancer treated with curative intent report moderate or high burden 3 years after treatment. Fatigue of the patient and depression of the spousal caregiver are associated with caregiver burden. To improve clinical care, identification of spousal caregivers at risk for experiencing higher caregiver burden and implementation of specific interventions is needed.

Indexed as

AgedAnxietyCaregiversCross-Sectional StudiesDepressionEsophageal NeoplasmsFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasm StagingQuality of LifeSpousesSurvivorsBurdenCaregiverEsophageal cancerUnmet needs

Identifiers

PMID25894882
PMCPMC4624832
OpenAlexW2036102318

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.