Assessing illness representations of breast cancer

Anagnostopoulos, Fotios; Spanea, Efrosyni

doi:10.1016/j.jpsychores.2004.09.011

Cited by 56 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 28 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Illness representations have been noted to impact outcomes in such disorders as heart disease [36], rheumatoid arthritis [37], cancer [38, 39], and limited reports in IBS [3, 4]. There is persistent evidence for the theoretical predictable relations between illness perceptions, coping, and outcomes across these studies.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The association of catastrophizing with quality-of-life outcomes in patients with irritable bowel syndrome

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundCatastrophizing is a cognitive process characterized by a propensity to concentrate on and magnify the value of an actual or anticipated painful stimulus and negatively assesses one’s ability to cope. Catastrophizing is an important predictor of pain-related outcomes. A cornerstone symptom of irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) is abdominal pain or discomfort. Also individuals with IBS have been reported to have a tendency to catastrophize. In a sample of individuals who suffer from IBS, we hypothesized that those individuals who catastrophize (catastrophizers) would have worse outcomes as compared to those who do not catastrophize (non-catastrophizers).MethodsOne hundred and one adults with IBS (79% female, mean age 42 years, 97% Caucasian) were recruited from outpatient clinics and data were collected through self-report measures. Catastrophizing was measured with the catastrophizing subscale of the Coping Strategies Questionnaire, illness representations were measured with The Revised Illness Perception Questionnaire (IPQ-R), psychological distress was measured with the Brief Symptom Inventory 18 (BSI-18), and health-related quality of life was measured using the Irritable Bowel Syndrome-Quality of Life (IBS-QOL) measure. Descriptive statistics, correlations, and multiple linear regression analyses were completed to describe participants, the associations of the variables of interest, and the unique relationship between psychosocial variables and HRQOL.ResultsOverall, participants reported poor HRQOL (M = 63.32, range 0–100). Catastrophizers differed significantly on IBS-QOL from non-catastrophizers (M = 48.98 vs. non-catastrophizers M = 78.53; p < 0.001), BSI-18 (M = 21.35 vs. non-catastrophizers M = 6.76; p < 0.001), and IPQ-R, specifically the consequences (M = 21.75 vs. non-catastrophizers M = 17.20; p < 0.001) and emotional representations (M = 20.90 vs. non-catastrophizers M = 15.43; p < 0.001). Catastrophizing was positively correlated with the consequences (r = .54; p < 0.01) and emotional representations (r = .65; p < 0.01) and negatively correlated with total HRQOL (r = −0.76; p < 0.01).ConclusionThe findings indicated that participants who catastrophized reported worse psychosocial and functional outcomes. Thus, catastrophizing, in addition to psychological distress variables, may be an important factor to address in optimizing health outcomes in individuals with IBS. In addition, illness perceptions were strongly related to catastrophizing and HRQOL; assessment and integration of illness perceptions as well as catastrophizing into the management of individuals who suffer with IBS may maximize the health outcomes.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The association of catastrophizing with quality-of-life outcomes in patients with irritable bowel syndrome

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Patients and survivors identify many different kinds of possible environmental causes for their breast cancer. A total of 15 of the 24 studies were reviewed and reported that women with breast cancer believed there was a connection between exposure to environmental toxins and their diagnosis [9,[13][14][15][16]24,[35][36][37][38][39][40][42][43][44]. In these studies, environmental toxins were defined as actions of other people (e.g., exposure to second-hand smoke), hazards found at the workplace, specific carcinogens, air pollution, exposure to chemical substances, toxic injury, and/or radiation.…”

Section: Environmental Attributionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A total of nine studies included in the review found that there were women who believed that their personality caused their breast cancer [9,13,[34][35][36]40,43,44,52] . Estimates of the prevalence of this belief ranged from 2.6 % (n=6) [9]to 35.0% (n=22) [35].…”

Section: Causal Attributions Identified But Not Validated By Expert Cmentioning

confidence: 99%

What causes breast cancer? A systematic review of causal attributions among breast cancer survivors and how these compare to expert-endorsed risk factors

Dumalaon-Canaria

Hutchinson

Prichard

et al. 2014

Cancer Causes Control

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

What causes breast cancer? A systematic review of causal attributions among breast cancer survivors and how these compare to expert endorsed risks'. Cancer Causes and Control, vol 25 (7) 2014, pp. 771-785. Copyright (2014) Springer International PublishingSwitzerland. All rights reserved. Please note that any alterations made during the publishing process may not appear in this version.The final publication is available at Springer via http:// dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10552-014-0377-3. psychological. Lifestyle-related attributions such as physical inactivity were coded as internal to the individual and modifiable. By contrast, environmental attributions such as air pollution and occupational hazards were considered external to the individual and fixed or non-modifiable. These characteristics tended to correlate so that internal and unstable attributions such as lifestyle-related factors were considered controllable whereas external attributions were likely to stem from the environment and exhibited lower controllability.Although causal attributions alone will not predict patients' behaviors and explain the complexity of human actions, attribution theory provides a framework for understanding the cognitions that influence healthrelated behaviors. Beliefs that people hold with regards to the cause of their own illness influence their decision to seek help, to adhere to medical treatment and their psychological adjustment, during and after treatment [6,10]. Attribution theory also helps explain affective responses to cancer and ways of coping. In the broader population, the media is another factor that shapes understandings of breast cancer causation among women. For example, media coverage of celebrity diagnoses of breast cancer in young women may have led to underestimation of age as a risk factor [27]. Similarly, reports focused on personal accounts of affected women with a family history of breast cancer may have influenced views that breast cancer is a predominantly genetic disease [28]. Social media, particularly blog posts and discussion posts shared by breast cancer patients themselves, has also become an influential and credible forum for the promulgation of health information [29].The following systematic review serves to comprehensively summarize literature on beliefs that affected women have about the cause of their own breast cancer and contrasts this with expert consensus derived from meta-analyses of various risk factors for breast cancer. Findings of this study may inform psychoeducational interventions which can help affected women develop accurate and adaptive beliefs about the cause of their breast cancer. Methodology Data SourcesThe following PubMed, PsycINFO and Web of Knowledge search was conducted on January 25, 2013:(breast cancer OR breast neoplasm) AND (caus* 1 OR attribute* OR belie* OR attitude OR illness 1 *Search term and its derivatives were used (e.g., cause, causes, causal) Inclusion/Exclusion CriteriaStudies were included in the review if they reported causal attributions or beliefs of...

show abstract

“…'breathlessness', 'headaches') rated on a yes (1)/ no (0) scale, with respect to patients' views at the present moment. The IPQ-R, and its predecessor the IPQ [31], have been shown to be reliable and valid, and to predict various aspects of illness adaptation and recovery, in a range of samples including cancer patients [30,32-37]. Patients will be asked to complete the IPQ-R at T1.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Feasibility test of a UK-scalable electronic system for regular collection of patient-reported outcome measures and linkage with clinical cancer registry data: The electronic Patient-reported Outcomes from Cancer Survivors (ePOCS) system

Ashley

Jones

Forman

et al. 2011

BMC Med Inform Decis Mak

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundCancer survivors can face significant physical and psychosocial challenges; there is a need to identify and predict which survivors experience what sorts of difficulties. As highlighted in the UK National Cancer Survivorship Initiative, routine post-diagnostic collection of patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) is required; to be most informative, PROMs must be linked and analysed with patients' diagnostic and treatment information. We have designed and built a potentially cost-efficient UK-scalable electronic system for collecting PROMs via the internet, at regular post-diagnostic time-points, for linking these data with patients' clinical data in cancer registries, and for electronically managing the associated patient monitoring and communications; the electronic Patient-reported Outcomes from Cancer Survivors (ePOCS) system. This study aims to test the feasibility of the ePOCS system, by running it for 2 years in two Yorkshire NHS Trusts, and using the Northern and Yorkshire Cancer Registry and Information Service.Methods/DesignNon-metastatic breast, colorectal and prostate cancer patients (largest survivor groups), within 6 months post-diagnosis, will be recruited from hospitals in the Yorkshire Cancer Network. Participants will be asked to complete PROMS, assessing a range of health-related quality-of-life outcomes, at three time-points up to 15 months post-diagnosis, and subsequently to provide opinion on the ePOCS system via a feedback questionnaire. Feasibility will be examined primarily in terms of patient recruitment and retention rates, the representativeness of participating patients, the quantity and quality of collected PROMs data, patients' feedback, the success and reliability of the underpinning informatics, and the system running costs. If sufficient data are generated during system testing, these will be analysed to assess the health-related quality-of-life outcomes reported by patients, and to explore if and how they relate to disease, treatment and/or individual differences characteristics.DiscussionThere is currently no system in the UK for collecting PROMs online and linking these with patients' clinical data in cancer registries. If feasible, ePOCS has potential to provide an affordable UK-scalable technical platform to facilitate and support longitudinal cohort research, and improve understanding of cancer survivors' experiences. Comprehensive understanding of survivorship difficulties is vital to inform the development and provision of supportive services and interventions.

show abstract

Assessing illness representations of breast cancer

Cited by 56 publications

References 28 publications

The association of catastrophizing with quality-of-life outcomes in patients with irritable bowel syndrome

The association of catastrophizing with quality-of-life outcomes in patients with irritable bowel syndrome

What causes breast cancer? A systematic review of causal attributions among breast cancer survivors and how these compare to expert-endorsed risk factors

Feasibility test of a UK-scalable electronic system for regular collection of patient-reported outcome measures and linkage with clinical cancer registry data: The electronic Patient-reported Outcomes from Cancer Survivors (ePOCS) system

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About