How well do cancer survivor self-classifications of anxiety, depression and stress agree with a standardised tool? Results of a cross-sectional study

There is poor uptake of psychosocial interventions offered to people with cancer who record high scores on distress screening scales. Intervention uptake may be influenced by a mismatch between consumer (bottom-up) and professional (top-down) paradigms of wellbeing. The current research aims to comp...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:PloS one 2019-09, Vol.14 (9), p.e0222107-e0222107
Main Authors: Carey, Mariko, Bryant, Jamie, Zucca, Alison, Hall, Alix, Grady, Alice, Dilworth, Sophie, Peek, Kerry
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Adolescent
Adult
Aged
Aged, 80 and over
Anxiety
Anxiety - classification
Anxiety - etiology
Australia
Biology and Life Sciences
Cancer
Cancer research
Cancer survivors
Cancer Survivors - psychology
Classification
Collaboration
Cross-Sectional Studies
Depression - classification
Depression - etiology
Diagnosis
Diagnostic Self Evaluation
Female
Health behavior
Health screening
Hematologic Neoplasms - complications
Hematologic Neoplasms - psychology
Hematology
Humans
Male
Medical diagnosis
Medical research
Medicine
Medicine and Health Sciences
Mental depression
Middle Aged
Oncology
Patients
Psychological aspects
Psychological Distress
Public health
Questionnaires
Screening
Self evaluation
Social Sciences
Stress
Stress (Psychology)
Stress, Psychological - classification
Stress, Psychological - etiology
Studies
Surveys and Questionnaires
Survival
Systematic review
Young Adult
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:There is poor uptake of psychosocial interventions offered to people with cancer who record high scores on distress screening scales. Intervention uptake may be influenced by a mismatch between consumer (bottom-up) and professional (top-down) paradigms of wellbeing. The current research aims to compare cancer survivors' 'self-judgements' about their levels of anxiety, depression and stress, to classifications derived via a professional-driven measure, the Depression, Anxiety and Stress Scale (DASS-21). A cross-sectional study was undertaken with haematological cancer survivors recruited from three population-based cancer registries in Australia. Consenting participants were mailed a questionnaire package; and non-responders received a second questionnaire package after 3-weeks and a reminder call after 6-weeks. The consumer-driven perspective was assessed via three separate single items asking survivors to self-classify their levels of anxiety, depression and stress over the past week on a scale from 'normal' to 'extremely severe'. The professional-driven classification was assessed via the DASS-21. Kappa statistics were used to assess agreement between consumer- and professional-driven measures. Of 2,971 eligible haematological cancer survivors, 1,239 (42%) provided written consent and were mailed a questionnaire package. Of these, 984 (79%) returned a completed questionnaire. The simple kappa for agreement between the DASS-21 and self-classified measures for anxiety was 0.47 (95% CI: 0.39 to 0.54, p
ISSN:1932-6203
1932-6203
DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0222107