Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40397152›Full record

ArticleSupportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer2025

Predictors of distress among individuals with cancer reporting physical problems.

McKinzey Dierkes, Yilin Cai, Victoria Trotta, Patricia Policicchio, Sijin Wen, Gwendolyn Dzwil, Nicholas Davis, Nicole L Stout

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

8 authors.

McKinzey DierkesWest Virginia Clinical and Translational Science Institute, Morgantown, WV, 26506, USA. mkd00001@mix.wvu.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0974-149X
Yilin CaiDepartment of Epidemiology & Biostatistics, West Virginia University, Morgantown, WV, 26505, USA.
Victoria TrottaDivision of Physical Therapy, West Virginia University School of Medicine, Morgantown, WV, USA.
Patricia PolicicchioWest Virginia University Medicine, WVU Cancer Institute, Morgantown, WV, USA.
Sijin WenDepartment of Epidemiology & Biostatistics, West Virginia University, Morgantown, WV, 26505, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6955-2917
Gwendolyn DzwilHealth Policy, Management, and Leadership, West Virginia University School of Public Health, Morgantown, WV, USA.
Nicholas DavisHealth Policy, Management, and Leadership, West Virginia University School of Public Health, Morgantown, WV, USA.
Nicole L StoutHealth Policy, Management, and Leadership, West Virginia University School of Public Health, Morgantown, WV, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0153-5440

Funding

National Institute of General Medical Sciences of the National Institutes of Health 5U54GM104942-08
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposePsychological distress among cancer patients is linked to adverse outcomes. The enhanced Distress Thermometer (eDT) allows patients to self-report distress levels on a Likert scale (0-10) and select from a list of physical, emotional, family, and psychological problems contributing to their distress. The physical problem list includes symptoms and functional impairments. Little is known about the predictive validity of the eDT physical problem list. This study aims to evaluate predictors of risk associated with distress scores measured by the eDT among patients with physical problems.

methodsPatient medical records with significant distress were reviewed, defined by eDT scores ≥ 6 with any physical problems or scores < 6 with > 3 problems selected. Patients were categorized into three groups based on eDT score: mild (1-3), moderate (4-6), and severe (7-10). The chi-square test assessed differences in demographic and clinical variables across distress categories. Linear regression evaluated associations between distress scores and significant predictive variables.

resultsData from 549 patients showed severe distress was common among head and neck, breast, skin, and colorectal cancers. Significant predictors of distress included age, gender, geography, and number of physical problems (NPP) reported. Higher distress was associated with individuals younger, female, urban, and reporting more physical problems. The regression model explained 15% of the variance in distress scores.

conclusionsAge, geography, gender, and NPP were factors influencing distress in cancer patients. Future research is recommended to develop more comprehensive clinical and demographic profiles to better identify cancer patients at risk for high distress and unmet supportive care needs.

Indexed as

NeoplasmsPsychological DistressStress, PsychologicalAdultAgedAged, 80 and overAge FactorsFemaleHumansLinear ModelsMaleMiddle AgedRisk FactorsSelf ReportSeverity of Illness IndexSex FactorsCancer survivorshipDistress screeningDistress thermometerRehabilitation navigatorSupportive care

Identifiers

PMID40397152

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.