Jamie S Ostroff1, Kristen E Riley1, Megan J Shen2, Thomas M Atkinson1, Timothy J Williamson1, Heidi A Hamann3. 1. Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York. 2. Medicine Department, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, New York. 3. Department of Psychology and Department of Family & Community Medicine, University of Arizona, Tucson, Arizona.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: In an effort to provide further evidence for the validity of the Lung Cancer Stigma Inventory (LCSI), this paper examined group differences in lung cancer stigma for patients who report clinically significant depressive symptoms and established a suggested scoring benchmark to identify patients with clinically meaningful levels of lung cancer stigma. METHODS: Patients (N = 231) who were diagnosed with lung cancer and treated within the past 12 months at one of two National Cancer Institute (NCI)-designated Cancer Centers located in the northeast and southern parts of the United States completed a single battery of questionnaires examining lung cancer stigma and depressed mood. Group differences, bivariate correlations, and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analyses were conducted. RESULTS: Slightly more than a third of patients (35.9%) reported an elevated level of depression. There was a significant correlation (r = 0.44) between lung cancer stigma and depressive mood. The ROC curve analysis indicated an area under curve (AUC) of 0.71. A LCSI cutoff score of 37.5 yielded the optimal ratio of sensitivity (0.93) to specificity (0.70) for identifying patients with clinically meaningful lung cancer stigma. CONCLUSIONS: Consistent with prior work, lung cancer stigma, as measured by the LCSI, was found to be moderately associated with depressed mood. Clinical investigators may use an LCSI total score above 37.5 (ie, greater than or equal to 38 on the LCSI scale of integer scores) as a clinical threshold for identifying patients who may be experiencing clinically meaningful stigma and may benefit from stigma-reducing interventions.
OBJECTIVE: In an effort to provide further evidence for the validity of the Lung Cancer Stigma Inventory (LCSI), this paper examined group differences in lung cancer stigma for patients who report clinically significant depressive symptoms and established a suggested scoring benchmark to identify patients with clinically meaningful levels of lung cancer stigma. METHODS:Patients (N = 231) who were diagnosed with lung cancer and treated within the past 12 months at one of two National Cancer Institute (NCI)-designated Cancer Centers located in the northeast and southern parts of the United States completed a single battery of questionnaires examining lung cancer stigma and depressed mood. Group differences, bivariate correlations, and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analyses were conducted. RESULTS: Slightly more than a third of patients (35.9%) reported an elevated level of depression. There was a significant correlation (r = 0.44) between lung cancer stigma and depressive mood. The ROC curve analysis indicated an area under curve (AUC) of 0.71. A LCSI cutoff score of 37.5 yielded the optimal ratio of sensitivity (0.93) to specificity (0.70) for identifying patients with clinically meaningful lung cancer stigma. CONCLUSIONS: Consistent with prior work, lung cancer stigma, as measured by the LCSI, was found to be moderately associated with depressed mood. Clinical investigators may use an LCSI total score above 37.5 (ie, greater than or equal to 38 on the LCSI scale of integer scores) as a clinical threshold for identifying patients who may be experiencing clinically meaningful stigma and may benefit from stigma-reducing interventions.
Authors: Donald L Patrick; Laurie B Burke; Chad J Gwaltney; Nancy Kline Leidy; Mona L Martin; Elizabeth Molsen; Lena Ring Journal: Value Health Date: 2011-10-13 Impact factor: 5.725
Authors: Janine K Cataldo; Robert Slaughter; Thierry M Jahan; Voranan L Pongquan; Won Ju Hwang Journal: Oncol Nurs Forum Date: 2011-01 Impact factor: 2.172
Authors: Laurie E Steffen; Kevin E Vowles; Bruce W Smith; Gregory N Gan; Martin J Edelman Journal: Health Psychol Date: 2017-11-27 Impact factor: 4.267
Authors: Denise R Aberle; Amanda M Adams; Christine D Berg; William C Black; Jonathan D Clapp; Richard M Fagerstrom; Ilana F Gareen; Constantine Gatsonis; Pamela M Marcus; JoRean D Sicks Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2011-06-29 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Deanna M Kaplan; Heidi A Hamann; Sarah N Price; Timothy J Williamson; Elizabeth S Ver Hoeve; Mairead H McConnell; Jennifer E Duchschere; Linda L Garland; Jamie S Ostroff Journal: J Psychosoc Oncol Date: 2022-02-06
Authors: Erica T Warner; Elyse R Park; Christina M Luberto; Julia Rabin; Giselle K Perez; Jamie S Ostroff Journal: Psychooncology Date: 2021-11-19 Impact factor: 3.955
Authors: Smita C Banerjee; Noshin Haque; Elizabeth A Schofield; Timothy J Williamson; Chloe M Martin; Carma L Bylund; Megan J Shen; Maureen Rigney; Heidi A Hamann; Patricia A Parker; Daniel C McFarland; Bernard J Park; Daniela Molena; Aimee Moreno; Jamie S Ostroff Journal: Chest Date: 2020-12-16 Impact factor: 9.410
Authors: Timothy J Williamson; Edward B Garon; Jenessa R Shapiro; Denise A Chavira; Jonathan W Goldman; Annette L Stanton Journal: Health Psychol Date: 2022-04 Impact factor: 5.556
Authors: Chandylen L Nightingale; Laurie E Steffen; Janet A Tooze; William Petty; Suzanne C Danhauer; Hoda Badr; Kathryn E Weaver Journal: Glob Adv Health Med Date: 2019-07-17
Authors: Timothy J Williamson; Jamie S Ostroff; Chloé M Martin; Smita C Banerjee; Carma L Bylund; Heidi A Hamann; Megan Johnson Shen Journal: Patient Educ Couns Date: 2020-08-11