Patients with low socioeconomic status (SES) are among the most underserved groups of people regarding cancer care. Analyzing the impact of the coronavirus‐induced disease 2019 (COVID‐19) pandemic on health care disparities and calling attention to inequalities in cancer care is crucial to justify and initiate adequate countermeasures. We aimed to determine whether the COVID‐19 pandemic aggravated health care disparities of cancer outpatients related to their SES and analyzed patient data of the largest university center providing services for patients with hematologic and oncologic disorders in Austria from 2018 to 2021. SES was assessed using three indicators: monthly net household income, level of education and occupational prestige. In total, 1217 cancer outpatients (51.1% female) with a mean age of 59.4 years (SD = 14.2) participated. In the first year of the pandemic, the relative proportion of individuals with low income, low education level and low occupational prestige seeking cancer care at our outpatient center decreased significantly (P ≤ .015). The strongest indicator was income, with a consistent effect throughout the first pandemic year. Countermeasures and specific interventions to support cancer patients with low SES in their access to health care should be initiated and prioritized.

Aims Cancer patients often present with psychological symptoms that affect their quality of life, physical health outcomes and survival. Two of the most frequent psychiatric comorbidities are anxiety and depression. However, the prevalence of these disorders among cancer patients remains unclear, as studies frequently report varying rates. In the present study, we aimed to provide robust point estimates for the prevalence of anxiety and depression for both a mixed cancer sample and for 13 cancer types separately, considering confounding variables. Methods In a sample of 7509 cancer outpatients (51.4% female), we used the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale to assess rates of anxiety and depression. Applying ordinal logistic regression models, we compared the prevalence of anxiety and depression between different cancer types, controlling for age and gender. Results About one third of our sample showed symptoms of anxiety (35.2%) or depression (27.9%), and every sixth patient had a very likely psychiatric condition, with women being more frequently affected. Elderly patients more often showed signs of depression. The prevalence of anxiety and depression was significantly higher in lung and brain cancer patients, than in other cancer patients. Lowest depression rates were found in breast cancer patients. Conclusions The prevalence of anxiety and depression is high in cancer patients. Type of cancer is an important predictor for anxiety and depressive symptoms, with lung and brain cancer patients being highly burdened. Considering a personalised medicine approach, physicians should take into account the high prevalence of psychiatric comorbidities and include psychiatric consultations in the treatment plan.

Investigations into the intimate relationships of sexual minorities are proliferating, but often adopt a deficit-oriented and US-centered perspective. In this tri-nation online study with sexual minority participants from Austria, Germany, and Switzerland (N = 571), we (i) assessed the construct validity of the German version of a well-known measure for positive minority identity aspects (the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual Positive Identity Measure; LGB-PIM), and (ii) explored associations between these aspects (self-awareness, authenticity, community, capacity for intimacy, and social justice) and self-reported relationship quality. Model fit of the German version of the LGB-PIM was deemed acceptable. Higher levels of positive minority identity aspects showed small to moderate associations with higher levels of relationship quality in bivariate analyses, but only capacity for intimacy was linked to relationship quality in higher-order models (controlling for country, age, sexual orientation, gender identity, relationship length, and psychological distress). Results remained robust in several sensitivity analyses. Our results highlight the differential role of positive identity aspects for relationship functioning, with capacity for intimacy as a fruitful leverage point for therapeutic work.

Investigations into the intimate relationships of people with diverse sexual orientations are proliferating, but often adopt a deficit-oriented and US-centered perspective. In this tri-nation online study with participants from Austria, Germany, and Switzerland (N = 571; 59% lesbian/gay, 27% bi-/plurisexual, 14% queer/other; 56% cis-female, 14% cis-male, 29% diverse gender identity) we (i) assessed the construct validity of the German version of a well-known measure for positive minority identity aspects (the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual Positive Identity Measure; LGB-PIM), and (ii) explored associations between these aspects (self-awareness, authenticity, community, capacity for intimacy, and social justice) and perceived relationship quality (Perceived Relationship Quality Components Inventory; PRQC). After mild respecifications, model fit of the German version of the LGB-PIM was deemed acceptable. Higher levels of positive minority identity aspects were associated with higher relationship quality in bivariate analyses (r = .12 for social justice to r = .35 for capacity for intimacy), but only capacity for intimacy was linked to relationship quality in higher-order models when controlling for country, age, sexual orientation, gender identity, relationship length, and psychological distress (Depression Anxiety and Stress Scales; DASS-21). Results remained robust in several sensitivity analyses. Our results highlight the need for a positive psychological perspective in research and practice concerning the intimate relationships of people with diverse sexual orientations.

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic has affected psychological wellbeing in many aspects, but its influence on cancer patients it not yet clear, and studies show mixed results. Aims: We aimed to investigate the impact of the pandemic on psychological symptom burden against the socio-economic background of cancer patients using data from routine assessments before and during the pandemic. Methods: Standardised assessment instruments were applied in N = 1,329 patients to screen for symptoms of anxiety, depression, post-traumatic stress, and fatigue from 2018 to 2022. Two MANOVAs with separate ANOVAs and Bonferroni pairwise comparisons as post-hoc tests were computed. First, only time was included as predictor to examine the isolated impact of the pandemic. Second, income level and education level were included as further predictors to additionally test the predictive power of socioeconomic risk factors. All tests were two-sided. Results: Once indicators of socioeconomic status were included in the analysis, the seeming influence of the pandemic became negligible. Only income had a significant impact on all aspects of psychological symptom burden, with patients with low income being highly burdened (partial eta-squared = .01, p = .023). The highest mean difference was found for depressive symptoms (MD = 0.13, CI = [0.07; 0.19], p < .001). The pandemic had no further influence on psychological distress. Conclusions: Although the pandemic is a major stressor in many respects, poverty is by far the most important risk factor for psychological symptom burden in cancer outpatients and outweighs the impact of the pandemic.