ArticleBMC palliative care2022
Exploring the psychological and religious perspectives of cancer patients and their future financial planning: a Q-methodological approach.
Article in BMC palliative care, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Colorectal cancer patients' experiences with antineoplastic agents from the perspective of their significant others: a longitudinal qualitative study.International journal of clinical pharmacy · 2026Article
- Caring for Pregnant Patients with Cancer: A Framework for Ethical and Patient-Centred Care.Cancers · 2024Review
- Financial toxicity in cancer palliative care in India: Addressing existence and beyond - Seeking remedies for a balanced financial journey.Ecancermedicalscience · 2024Article
- Psychological Distress and Concerns of In-Home Older People Living with Cancer and Their Impact on Supportive Care Needs: An Observational Survey.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2023Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCancer patients are often hesitant to talk about their mental health, religious beliefs regarding the disease, and financial issues that drain them physically and psychologically. But there is a need to break this taboo to understand the perceptions and behaviours of the patients. Previous studies identified many psychological factors that are bothering cancer patients. However, it still requires exploring new elements affecting their mental and physical health and introducing new coping strategies to address patients' concerns.
methodsThe current study aims to identify cancer patients' perceived attitudes towards the severity of illness, understand their fears, tend towards religion to overcome the disease, and future financial planning by using a Q-methodological approach. Data were collected in three steps from January-June 2020, and 51 cancer patients participated in the final stage of Q-sorting.
resultsThe findings of the study are based on the principal component factor analysis that highlighted three essential factors: (1) feelings, (2) religious beliefs about the acceptance of death, and (3) their future personal and financial planning. Further, the analysis shows that the patients differ in their beliefs, causes and support that they received as a coping mechanism.
conclusionThis study explains cancer patients' psychological discomfort and physical pain but cannot relate it to co-morbidities. Q methodology allows the contextualization of their thoughts and future planning in different sets, like acceptance of death, combating religion's help, and sharing experiences through various platforms. This study will help health professionals derive new coping strategies for treating patients and financial managers to design insurance policies that help them to share their financial burdens.
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.