ArticleHealth psychology report2025
Fatigue of oncological patients - incompatible perspectives of patients and medical staff.
Article in Health psychology report, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCancer-related fatigue is a complex syndrome and the most frequently reported complaint, especially during treatment. Sometimes a large discrepancy in patient fatigue estimations between the patients themselves and medical staff is observed. The main goal of this study was to compare fatigue from the patients' and the medical staff's perspectives. PARTICIPANTS AND PROCEDURE: The methods used included author-designed surveys for both the patient (questions about fatigue, intensity, causes and influence on life constructed mostly in the form of numerical rating scales) and the medical staff (the same questions on the perception of the patient's fatigue), the Chalder Fatigue Questionnaire, and the EORTC QLQ-C30. The study involved 51 cancer patients during chemotherapy treatment.
resultsFor 63% of the subjects, there was convergence of fatigue assessments made by patients and staff. Differences were visible in the staff's and patients' assessment of the intensity of fatigue experienced by the patients. The simple question "Are you fatigued (yes or no)?" corresponded to all questionnaires and scales in the case of patients. The equivalent question to the staff, "Is the patient fatigued (yes or no)?", corresponded only to the patients' current assessment of fatigue and with no other score on the questionnaire or scale that the patients filled out about their fatigue. Also, patients identified more causes of fatigue and staff overestimated the influence of chemotherapy on fatigue. Of the patient subjects, 51.4% did not know of any ways to cope with fatigue, and most of them talked about it only to family and friends.
conclusionsDespite existing recommendations on the need to screen and educate patients in this matter, the issue of fatigue still requires attention.
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.