Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32788165›Full record

SynthesisEvidence-based mental health2020

Depression treatment research in people with cancer does not reflect cancer prevalence: findings from a systematic review.

Benjamin Bravery, Siobhan Loughnan, Michael Murphy

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Evidence-based mental health, 2020. 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
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

  1. Guideline
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. The impact of coping styles on anxiety and depression trajectories in thyroid cancer surgery patients: a longitudinal study.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2026
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. 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

3 authors.

Benjamin BraverySchool of Medicine, The University of Notre Dame Australia, Darlinghurst, New South Wales, Australia benbravery@yahoo.com.au.ORCID 0000-0001-5215-2418
Siobhan LoughnanClinical Research Unit for Anxiety and Depression (CRUfAD) at St Vincent's Hospital, UNSW, Darlinghurst, New South Wales, Australia.
Michael MurphyClinical Research Unit for Anxiety and Depression (CRUfAD) at St Vincent's Hospital, UNSW, Darlinghurst, New South Wales, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundOne in six people with cancer will develop depression at some point in their care. Untreated depression affects quality of life, cancer care satisfaction and healthcare expenditure. Treatments for this vulnerable heterogenous population should be evidence based and specific. A common sentiment is that psychiatric research does not reflect the prevalence of patients with cancer and comorbid depression and is biased towards certain cancers, but this has not been empirically shown. STUDY SELECTION AND ANALYSIS: A systematic review of studies on psychological and pharmacological treatments for depression in people with cancer was conducted. Of 4621 papers identified from a search of PubMed and PsycINFO up to 27 June 2020, 84 met inclusion criteria (eg, adults with cancer; depression diagnosis; treatment study) and comprised 6048 participants with depression with cancer.

findingsCancer types are not proportionally represented in depression research in accordance with their incidence. Breast cancer is over-represented (relative frequency in research 49.3%, but 11.7% of global cancer). Cancers of the head and neck and bone and soft tissue were close to parity. All other cancers are under-represented. Representativeness varied 40-fold across different cancers.

conclusionsThe evidence base for depression treatments is dominated by a single cancer. Given heterogeneity in cancer populations (eg, stage of illness; psychological impact; cancer treatments), it is possible that depression treatments may not have the same benefits and harms across all cancers, impeding the ability to offer people with different cancers the best depression treatment. While the dominant opinion within this research field is that a cancer bias exists, this is the first study to demonstrate as such.

Indexed as

Practice Guidelines as TopicAdultAgedAged, 80 and overAntidepressive AgentsAntineoplastic AgentsDepressionEvidence-Based NursingFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasmsAntidepressive AgentsAntineoplastic Agentsdepression & mood disorders

Identifiers

PMID32788165
PMCPMC10231615

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.