Objective: To investigate whether the observed elevated levels of psychological distress in cancer survivors relate specifically to aspects of cancer diagnosis, to treatment or to disability. Design, participants and setting: Self‐reported questionnaire data on demographic, health and lifestyle factors and mental health from 89 574 Australian men and women aged 45 years or older, sampled from the Medicare database for the 45 and Up Study from 1 February 2006 to 30 April 2008. Logistic regression was used to examine the risk of high levels of psychological distress in relation to cancer diagnosis and disability, adjusting for age, sex, income and education. Main outcome measure: High psychological distress (Kessler Psychological Distress Scale score ≥22). Results: Overall, 7.5% of participants had high levels of psychological distress. Among cancer survivors, the median time since diagnosis was 7.3 years. Compared with people without cancer, the odds ratios (95% CIs) for psychological distress were: 1.17 (1.09–1.26) in people reporting having had any cancer apart from non‐melanoma skin cancer; 1.34 (1.08–1.67) in those with cancer diagnosed in the previous year; 1.53 (1.33–1.76) for those reporting treatment for cancer in the previous month and 1.11 (1.03–1.19) for those with cancer but without recent treatment. Using individuals with neither cancer nor disability as the reference group, the adjusted odds ratio (95% CI) for psychological distress was 6.51 (5.95–7.12) in those reporting significant disability but no cancer, 1.14 (1.04–1.24) in those without disability but with cancer and 5.81(4.88–6.91) in those with both cancer and disability. Conclusion: The risk of psychological distress in individuals with cancer relates much more strongly to their level of disability than it does to the cancer diagnosis itself.

Background: The relationship between comorbidity and psychological distress is well documented, however the mechanism of this association is unclear. We aim to assess the extent to which the association between common chronic conditions and high scores on the Kessler Psychological Distress Scale (K10) measure of psychological distress vary according to comorbid conditions, disability, and sociodemographic circumstances. Methods: Analysis of self-reported cross-sectional data from the New South Wales 45 and Up Study, Australia, for 236,508 participants aged 45 years and over, using logistic regression modeling. Results: Self-reported heart attack/angina, other heart disease, stroke, and diabetes were all significantly associated with higher risk of high/very high K10 scores. These associations were attenuated, but remained statistically significant, when comorbidity, disability, and sociodemographic factors were added to the model. Men reporting needing help for daily tasks were nine times as likely to report high/very high K10 scores as those without this need, and women reporting needing help were seven times more likely to have high/very high K10 scores. Conclusions: Heart attack/angina, other heart disease, stroke, and diabetes are all significantly associated with psychological distress. However, these effects are partly explained by other comorbid conditions, limitations on physical functioning, and sociodemographic factors. These findings highlight the importance of developing public health policies that encompass psychological, physiological, and social domains, and provide crucial insights for clinicians in identifying and supporting those people at risk of psychological distress. Depression andAnxiety 31:524-532, 2014. C 2013 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

(i) Although the effectiveness of this warming technique is influenced by patient/procedure characteristics, these do not predict normothermia (uncertainty +/-28 min). Effectiveness is independent of simple thermal measures. (ii) Previously described measures of vasoconstriction are not valid in children. (iii) Our model shows children's thermal properties change with their T(core). However, key factors are unknown for an individual and our model does not predict heating efficacy. (iv) To minimize the risk of hyperthermia, we recommend continuous measurement of T(core) during convection heating. The device air temperature should be turned to medium (38 degrees C) as T(core) approaches 37 degrees C.