MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3192811719 · doi:10.1200/go.21.00056

Depression, Anxiety, and Other Mental Disorders in Patients With Cancer in Low- and Lower-Middle–Income Countries: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2021· review· en· W3192811719 on OpenAlexaff
Zoe Walker, Siqi Xue, Michael P. Jones, Arun Ravindran

Bibliographic record

VenueJCO Global Oncology · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer survivorship and care
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreUniversity of TorontoCentre for Addiction and Mental Health
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAnxietyMeta-analysisCINAHLMedicinePsycINFODepression (economics)PsychiatryMental healthPopulationPrevalence of mental disordersPrevalenceMEDLINEClinical psychologyPsychological interventionInternal medicineEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: Cancer is a growing public health issue in low- and lower-middle-income countries (LLMICs), but the mental health consequences in this setting have not been well-characterized. We aimed to systematically evaluate the available literature on the prevalence, associates, and treatment of mental disorders in patients with cancer in LLMICs. METHODS: We systematically searched Medline, PsycINFO, EMBASE, and CINAHL. We performed a random effects meta-analysis to determine the pooled prevalence of major depression or anxiety disorders in this population, defined by Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders or International Classification of Diseases criteria. We qualitatively reviewed studies that examined the prevalence of depressive or anxiety disorders defined by self-report tools, the prevalence of other mental disorders, associated factors of depressive and anxiety symptoms, and the treatment of mental disorders in this population. RESULTS: Forty studies spanning a 15-year period were included in the review. The pooled prevalence defined by Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders or International Classification of Diseases criteria was 21% for major depression (95% CI, 15 to 28) and 18% for anxiety disorders (95% CI, 8 to 30). Depressive and anxiety symptoms were most frequently associated with advanced disease and low levels of education. Among the four studies evaluating treatment, three evaluated the effectiveness of psychotherapy and one evaluated a yoga program. CONCLUSION: The prevalence of depression and anxiety in patients with cancer generally appears higher in LLMICs than in upper-income countries. Our findings demonstrate the existence of a significant and underappreciated disease burden. We suggest that clinicians remain vigilant to psychiatric symptoms. Improved screening and treatment are likely to improve quality of life and reduce both morbidity and mortality.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.025
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.051

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.025
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0190.030
Bibliometrics0.0080.009
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.022
GPT teacher head0.347
Teacher spread0.324 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations100
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJCO Global OncologySame topicCancer survivorship and careFrench-language works237,207