ArticleBMJ supportive & palliative care2026
Distress among primary caregivers of patients with cancer: a cross-sectional study.
Article in BMJ supportive & palliative care, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Longitudinal investigation of psychological adaptation and its determinants in primary caregivers following thyroid cancer surgery.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- Ordinal sentiment classification in cancer support forums: a controlled benchmark of machine learning and transformer models.Frontiers in digital health · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThe primary objective of this study was to determine the prevalence, severity and associated factors of distress among primary caregivers of patients with cancer using the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) distress thermometer (DT). The secondary objective was to examine the demographic characteristics and cancer types associated with clinically significant distress.
methodsA cross-sectional study was conducted at the oncology unit of B.P. Koirala Institute of Health Sciences, Dharan, Nepal, surveying 173 primary caregivers of patients with cancer between 22 September 2023 and 20 June 2024. An interview-based questionnaire, including the NCCN DT, assessed the prevalence and severity of distress. Distress levels were categorised as mild (DT 0-3), moderate (DT 4-6) and severe (DT 7-10); a score of ≥4 denoted clinically significant distress which encompasses moderate and severe distress. Secondary outcomes included domain-specific distress, sociodemographic and clinical factors.
resultsDistress was reported by all caregivers, with 91.9% experiencing clinically significant (DT≥4) and 49.7% severe distress (DT≥7); median DT score was 6 (SD=1.755). Clinically significant distress was more common in caregivers aged ≥30 years, married individuals (p=0.03) and those with lower education levels (p=0.01). Caregivers of patients with gastrointestinal/hepatobiliary (p=0.029) and breast cancers reported higher distress. Statistically insignificant (p=0.208) higher distress was observed among caregivers of patients undergoing multimodal/palliative treatment. Domain-specific analysis revealed distress across physical, emotional, practical, social and spiritual domains.
conclusionDistress among caregivers of patients with cancer in Nepal is significantly high. Routine screening and interventions reduce adverse outcomes and improve both caregiver well-being and patient care.
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.