↓ Skip to main content

Psychological distress and quality of life in lung cancer: the role of health‐related stigma, illness appraisals and social constraints

Overview of attention for article published in Psycho-Oncology, April 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (85th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (75th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
9 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
69 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
105 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Psychological distress and quality of life in lung cancer: the role of health‐related stigma, illness appraisals and social constraints
Published in
Psycho-Oncology, April 2015
DOI 10.1002/pon.3829
Pubmed ID
Authors

Suzanne K. Chambers, Peter Baade, Philippa Youl, Joanne Aitken, Stefano Occhipinti, Shalini Vinod, Patricia C. Valery, Gail Garvey, Kwun M. Fong, David Ball, Helen Zorbas, Jeff Dunn, Dianne L. O'Connell

Abstract

Health-related stigma is associated with negative psychological and quality of life outcomes in lung cancer patients. This study describes the impact of stigma on lung cancer patients' psychological distress and quality of life and explores the role of social constraints and illness appraisal as mediators of effect. A self-administered cross-sectional survey examined psychological distress and quality of life in 151 people (59% response rate) diagnosed with lung cancer from Queensland and New South Wales. Health-related stigma, social constraints and illness appraisals were assessed as predictors of adjustment outcomes. Forty-nine percent of patients reported elevated anxiety; 41% were depressed; and 51% had high global distress. Health-related stigma was significantly related to global psychological distress and quality of life with greater stigma and shame related to poorer outcomes. These effects were mediated by illness appraisals and social constraints. Health-related stigma appears to contribute to poorer adjustment by constraining interpersonal discussions about cancer and heightening feelings of threat. There is a need for the development and evaluation of interventions to ameliorate the negative effects of health-related stigma among lung cancer patients. © 2015 The Authors. Psycho-Oncology Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 105 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 104 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 20 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 17 16%
Student > Bachelor 13 12%
Researcher 10 10%
Student > Postgraduate 10 10%
Other 20 19%
Unknown 15 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 38 36%
Medicine and Dentistry 19 18%
Nursing and Health Professions 14 13%
Social Sciences 10 10%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 2%
Other 4 4%
Unknown 18 17%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 14 January 2019.
All research outputs
#2,108,843
of 15,996,322 outputs
Outputs from Psycho-Oncology
#314
of 1,922 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#55,015
of 368,196 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Psycho-Oncology
#13
of 52 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 15,996,322 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 86th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,922 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 368,196 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 52 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.