ArticlePloS one2026
Validation and limitations of the distress thermometer in identifying depression among metastatic breast cancer patients in Nigeria: Methodological challenges in depression-specific screening validation.
Article in PloS one, 2026. 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPsychological distress is highly prevalent among patients with metastatic breast cancer (MBC), yet validated screening tools remain scarce in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). The Distress Thermometer (DT), a globally endorsed screening instrument, lacks robust validation in advanced-stage cancer populations within LMIC contexts, where cultural, linguistic, and healthcare system factors may significantly influence its diagnostic performance.
objectiveTo assess the diagnostic validity of the Distress Thermometer in identifying clinically significant depressive symptoms among Nigerian women with metastatic breast cancer, using the Beck Depression Inventory-II (BDI-II) as the reference standard.
designCross-sectional diagnostic validation study employing receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis to evaluate DT performance, with optimal cutoff identified using Youden's Index. SETTING/
participantsA total of 309 histologically confirmed de-identified metastatic breast cancer patients were consecutively recruited from the NSIA-LUTH Cancer Centre, Lagos, Nigeria, between September 2020 and February 2022. All participants completed the DT, BDI-II, and EORTC QLQ-C30/BR23 modules.
resultsThe mean DT score was 3.4 (SD ± 1.6), with 47.0% of participants meeting the NCCN threshold for clinically significant distress (DT ≥ 4). In contrast, only 15.9% had BDI-II scores ≥20, indicating moderate-to-severe depressive symptoms. The DT demonstrated diagnostic performance significantly worse than random classification, with an AUC of 0.414 (95% CI: 0.326-0.503), significantly below the threshold for acceptable diagnostic accuracy (p < 0.001). The Youden-optimal cutoff was DT ≥ 7.5, yielding a sensitivity of 2.0% and specificity of 98.5%. At the commonly used DT ≥ 4 threshold, sensitivity was 34.7% and specificity was 50.8%, indicating poor overall diagnostic utility.
conclusionsIn this sub-Saharan African cancer cohort, the Distress Thermometer performed poorly in detecting clinically significant depression in this Nigerian MBC cohort when benchmarked against the BDI-II. This may reflect construct mismatch, somatic symptom confounding, cultural factors, or disease-specific characteristics of advanced cancer populations. The DT should not be used as a depression-specific screening tool in advanced cancer populations in LMICs, though its utility for identifying general distress remains unclear given the methodological limitations of this study. The poor concordance observed likely reflects construct mismatch, somatic symptom confounding in the reference standard, and the fundamental challenges of depression assessment in advanced cancer populations using self-report instruments. These findings underscore the critical need for appropriate reference standards (structured clinical interviews) and highlight methodological considerations in validating psychosocial screening tools across different constructs and cultural contexts.
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.