A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Cancer Treatment Side Effects: A Meta-analysis of the Relationship Between Response Expectancies and Experience. | LitMetric

Cancer Treatment Side Effects: A Meta-analysis of the Relationship Between Response Expectancies and Experience.

J Pain Symptom Manage

School of Psychology, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, The University of Adelaide, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia; Sansom Institute for Health Research, University of South Australia, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.

Published: August 2017

Context: Although previous research has, overall, suggested a moderate relationship between response expectancies (REs) and cancer treatment-related side effects, empirical results have been mixed.

Objectives: We aimed to further explore these relationships, hypothesizing that REs would predict subsequent toxicities with the inclusion of more recent studies, across a broader range of side effects, while incorporating the impact of potential moderators including patients' experience with treatment and measurement methods. We further investigated the impact of REs across individual toxicities.

Methods: A systematic search and analysis were conducted across four databases (PsychInfo, PubMed, CINAHL, and Embase) and reference lists, from 1985 to February 2016. This provided 27 eligible studies with 4474 participants, through which the main analysis, moderator analyses, and individual side-effect analyses were explored.

Results: REs were moderately related to side effects overall (r = 0.26), and effect sizes were significantly influenced by sample diagnostic homogeneity, whereas differences between type and timing of measurement showed trends. Of the 16 toxicities examined, 15 demonstrated significant relationships between REs and side-effect experience, with hair loss (r = 0.48) the strongest. No clear difference emerged between objective and subjective side effects; however, significant differences across individual toxicities were revealed.

Conclusion: Findings support a relationship between REs and a wide range of subsequent side effects, yet differences between individual RE-toxicity associations emerged. These findings provide direction for the measurement of side effects and REs and support REs as potential targets for intervention during the informed consent process.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2017.03.017DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

side effects
28
relationship response
8
response expectancies
8
res
8
effects differences
8
differences individual
8
side
7
effects
7
cancer treatment
4
treatment side
4

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!