ArticleSupportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer2021
Congruence of cancer pain experience between patients and family caregivers and associated factors: a multicenter cross-sectional study in China.
Article in Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer, 2021. 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.
- Knowledge and barriers to pain management among cancer caregivers in Malaysia: a cross-sectional study.PeerJ · 2026Article
- Defining dyadic cancer pain concordance using participant-initiated interactions with a remote health monitoring system.JAMIA open · 2025Article
- Predictors of emotional intelligence among family caregivers of cancer patients: A cross-sectional study.Cancer reports (Hoboken, N.J.) · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeThe purposes of this study were to determine whether there were differences in the cancer pain experience between patients and family caregivers (FCGs) and to explore the associated factors that influence cancer pain experience congruence.
methodsA multicenter cross-sectional study was conducted. A total of 410 patient-family caregiver dyads completed face-to-face surveys, including information about basic characteristics, the Patient Pain Questionnaire (PPQ), and the Family Pain Questionnaire (FPQ). The difference in cancer pain experience between patients and family caregivers was analyzed using a paired t test. Indicators for the congruence of cancer pain experience were analyzed using the chi-square test and two independent-sample t tests for bivariate analysis and multivariate binary logistic regression analysis.
resultsOf the patients, 57.1% were men, and 60.7% perceived moderate performance status. The majority of the family caregivers was female (54.9%). The mean (SD) score on the pain experience subscale was 4.82 (1.66) for 410 patients and 5.02 (1.66) for 410 family caregivers. The difference was significant (P < 0.01). Additionally, 87 (21.2%) dyads were in the congruent group, and 323 (78.8%) dyads were in the incongruent group. Patients' self-perceived moderate performance status (OR = 2.983, P < 0.01) and family caregivers' pain knowledge (OR = 1.171, P < 0.05) were the main factors influencing the congruence of cancer pain experience.
conclusionThe findings of this study indicate that family caregivers reported significantly worse cancer pain experiences than patients. Family caregivers' pain knowledge was a primary influencing factor. It is suggested that educational interventions aimed at teaching family caregivers and patients how to communicate their pain experience and improving the knowledge of family members regarding pain and its management may help in aligning their perceptions and thereby contribute to better quality of life and pain management outcomes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
33770256What 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.