Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30915569›Full record

Trial reportSupportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer2019

Stepped care targeting psychological distress in head and neck cancer and lung cancer patients: which groups specifically benefit? Secondary analyses of a randomized controlled trial.

Femke Jansen, Birgit I Lissenberg-Witte, Anna M H Krebber, Pim Cuijpers, Remco de Bree, Annemarie Becker-Commissaris, Egbert F Smit, Annemieke van Straten, Guus M Eeckhout, Aartjan T F Beekman and 2 more

Open access · hybridAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 25% 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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Effect of patient education in improving quality of life, fatigue and anxiety in people diagnosed with lung cancer: systematic review.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2026
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Feasibility and Acceptability ofJournal of clinical medicine · 2020
    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

12 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Femke JansenDepartment of Clinical, Neuro and Developmental Psychology, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Birgit I Lissenberg-WitteDepartment of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Amsterdam UMC, VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Anna M H KrebberDepartment of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam (CCA), Amsterdam UMC, VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Pim CuijpersDepartment of Clinical, Neuro and Developmental Psychology, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Remco de BreeUMC Utrecht Cancer Center, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Annemarie Becker-CommissarisDepartment of Pulmonary Diseases, Amsterdam UMC, VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Egbert F SmitDepartment of Pulmonary Diseases, Amsterdam UMC, VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Annemieke van StratenDepartment of Clinical, Neuro and Developmental Psychology, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Guus M EeckhoutDepartment of Psychiatry, Amsterdam UMC, VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Aartjan T F BeekmanDepartment of Psychiatry, Amsterdam UMC, VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
C René LeemansDepartment of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam (CCA), Amsterdam UMC, VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Irma M Verdonck-de LeeuwDepartment of Clinical, Neuro and Developmental Psychology, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. IM.Verdonck@vumc.nl.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4507-4607
Amsterdam UMC Location Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam · NLVrije Universiteit Amsterdam · NLUniversity Medical Center Utrecht · NL

Funding

ZonMw 300020012
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeStepped care (SC), consisting of watchful waiting, guided self-help, problem-solving therapy, and psychotherapy/medication is, compared to care-as-usual (CAU), effective in improving psychological distress. This study presents secondary analyses on subgroups of patients who might specifically benefit from watchful waiting, guided self-help, or the entire SC program.

methodsIn this randomized controlled trial, head and neck and lung cancer patients with distress (n = 156) were randomized to SC or CAU. Univariate logistic regression analyses were performed to investigate baseline factors associated with recovery after watchful waiting and guided self-help. Potential moderators of the effectiveness of SC compared to CAU were investigated using linear mixed models.

resultsPatients without a psychiatric disorder, with better psychological outcomes (HADS: all scales) and better health-related quality of life (HRQOL) (EORTC QLQ-C30/H&N35: global QOL, all functioning, and several symptom domains) were more likely to recover after watchful waiting. Patients with better scores on distress, emotional functioning, and dyspnea were more likely to recover after guided self-help. Sex, time since treatment, anxiety or depressive disorder diagnosis, symptoms of anxiety, symptoms of depression, speech problems, and feeling ill at baseline moderated the efficacy of SC compared to CAU.

conclusionsPatients with distress but who are relatively doing well otherwise, benefit most from watchful waiting and guided self-help. The entire SC program is more effective in women, patients in the first year after treatment, patients with a higher level of distress or anxiety or depressive disorder, patients who are feeling ill, and patients with less speech problems. TRIAL: NTR1868.

Indexed as

AnxietyDepressionFemaleHead and Neck NeoplasmsHumansLung NeoplasmsMaleMiddle AgedPsychotherapyPsychotropic DrugsQuality of LifeStress, PsychologicalWatchful WaitingPsychotropic DrugsAnxietyDepressionDistressHead and neck cancerModeratorsPsychosocial intervention

Identifiers

PMID30915569
PMCPMC6825034
OpenAlexW2922618859

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.