ArticleArchives of gynecology and obstetrics2025
Predictors of quality of life and resilience in patients with ovarian cancer during the COVID-19 pandemic: a cross-sectional study.
Article in Archives of gynecology and obstetrics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Symptom Burden, Depressive Symptoms, Resilient Coping, and Pretreatment Health-Related Quality of Life with Breast, Gynecological and Genitourinary Cancer.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2026Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe aim of this cross-sectional study was to investigate the psychosocial burdens of patients with ovarian cancer during the COVID-19 pandemic.
methodsOvarian cancer patients answered a quantitative survey assessing their resilience (BRS) and quality of life (FACT-G7) as well as clinical (first- vs. ≥ second-line treatment), demographic (age < 65 vs. ≥ 65 years) and COVID-19 pandemic-related psychosocial impairment, i.e. anxiety (GAD7); depression (PHQ2); global physical, mental, and social health (PROMIS items). Analyses of variance were applied to compare psychological impairment between patients on first- vs. ≥ second-line treatment and between patients aged < vs. ≥ 65 years at start of treatment. Multiple linear regression analyses were performed to evaluate predictors of patients' resilience and quality of life based on demographic, clinical, and psychosocial variables.
resultsMost of the 93 patients rated their physical and mental health, and satisfaction with social activities as good. Eighty-seven (91.4%) were somewhat or very concerned about the pandemic. Patients on first-line therapy reported a better quality of life (p = 0.03) and better general health (p = 0.014) than those on at least second-line therapy. Patients < 65 years old reported significantly more concern about the pandemic than older patients (p = 0.008). Predictors of resilience were severity of anxiety (GAD-7) and mental health. Predictors of quality of life were general health, severity of depression (PHQ-2), and type of therapy.
conclusionsPatients in first line of treatment and younger patients could benefit from support in coping with pandemic-related burdens, meaning that attention should be paid to potential psychological distress, which should be treated alongside the cancer.
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.