ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2020
Comparison of Illness Concepts and Coping Strategies among Cancer Patients of Turkish and German Origin.
Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Turkish validity and reliability study of Self-Blame Attributions for Cancer Scale: A methodological study.Palliative & supportive care · 2026Article
- Vitiligo in the Digital Spotlight: Retrospective Longitudinal Study in Germany.JMIR formative research · 2026Article
- Stigma and Quality of Life in Women With Breast Cancer: Mediation and Moderation Model of Social Support, Sense of Coherence, and Coping Strategies.Frontiers in psychology · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe aim of this study was to compare illness concepts and coping strategies among native German cancer patients and those with a Turkish migration background.
methodsGuideline-based, semi-structured interviews were conducted with 11 German (♂: 8, ♀: 3) and 11 Turkish (♂: 2, ♀: 9) cancer patients. The transcripts were evaluated using a qualitative content analysis in accordance with Mayring.
resultsWe identified eight categories of illness concepts: stressful life events, environmental influences, the will of God, medical factors, fate, trauma, health behaviour, and psychological causes. German patients frequently attributed their illness to environmental influences, persistent stress, or medical factors, whereas Turkish patients blamed persistent stress, the will of God, or trauma. The last two categories are not found among German patients. We classified the coping strategies into 11 main categories: social support, activity, patient competence, fighting spirit/positive thinking, use of health services/alternative healing methods, lifestyle, emotional coping, cognitive coping, religious coping, spiritual coping, and culture-specific methods for patients of Turkish origin. For German patients, activities as well as social support played primary roles in coping. Turkish patients also often used social support. However, in contrast to the German patients, they are less active and use much more religious coping and culture-specific means. In addition, negative emotions occur more often when processing the illness than in the German patients.
conclusionCommon illness representations and coping strategies could be found for Turkish and German patients, but also specific ones for the respective group. It is particularly noticeable that German patients attach more importance to medical factors and try more actively to cope with the illness. For Turkish patients, cultural and religious factors play an important role, which should also be considered in treatment.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.