Perceptions about cancer-related fatigue among cancer patients using Q methodology

Bang, Ho Yoon; Yeun, Eun Ja; Ham, Eunmi; Jeon, Misoon; An, Jeong Hwa

doi:10.1016/j.ejon.2015.03.013

Cited by 10 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“… Cancer‐related fatigue is one of the most frequent patient‐reported outcomes and is defined as a distressing, persistent, subjective sense of physical, emotional and/or cognitive tiredness or exhaustion related to cancer or cancer treatment that is not proportional to recent activity and interferes with usual functioning . …”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Quality of life, fatigue and changes therein as predictors of return to work during breast cancer treatment

Porro

Michel

Zinzindohoué³

et al. 2019

Scandinavian Caring Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose To our knowledge, only one study has assessed Quality of Life (QOL) as a predictor of return to work (RTW) during breast cancer treatment and one has evaluated multidimensional cancer‐related fatigue (CRF) as a determinant of RTW. However, no study has assessed the impact of changes in these variables on RTW. The objective of this study was to evaluate QOL, multidimensional CRF and changes in these variables as determinants of RTW during breast cancer treatment. Methods We performed a longitudinal study of 68 patients with a mean age of 46.97 years (SD = 6.92), who were employed at the time of diagnosis. Women were assessed at the beginning of adjuvant treatments (T0) and followed up with by telephone at three (T1) and 6 months later (T2), using questionnaires (QLQ‐C30; MFI‐20). Results Global QOL, OR = 1.12 [1.01–1.25], sleep disturbance, OR = 1.04 [1.002–1.08], fatigue (QLQ‐C30), OR = 0.93 [0.88–0.99], nausea‐vomiting, OR = 0.84 [0.73–0.97], reduced motivation, OR = 1.49 [1.05–2.11] and general fatigue, OR = 0.79 [0.63–0.99] at T0 were associated with RTW at T1. At T2 global QOL, OR = 1.09 [1.01–1.17], cognitive functioning, OR = 1.10 [1.03–1.17], general fatigue, OR = 1.82 [1.04–3.17] and mental fatigue, OR = 0.29 [0.11–0.81] were associated with RTW. Furthermore, changes in mental fatigue were associated with RTW at T2, OR = 0.02 [0.001–0.29]. Conclusions Quality of life, fatigue and their changes in them, especially cognitive functioning and mental fatigue, can play an important role in predicting the RTW of women with breast cancer. This confirms the importance of multidisciplinary care for cancer and the emergence of a theoretical psychological model of RTW.

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Quality of life, fatigue and changes therein as predictors of return to work during breast cancer treatment

Porro

Michel

Zinzindohoué³

et al. 2019

Scandinavian Caring Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Another common reason given by study authors for using Q-methodology was its rigour. Q-methodology was said to allow participants to create their own meaning while reducing the impact of prior assumptions and the potential biases of the researcher [ 69 , 70 ]. Many studies referred to the integration of qualitative and quantitative techniques as one of Q-methodology’s key strengths, [ 42 , 71 – 73 ] combining the richness of qualitative data with the rigour of statistical analysis [ 74 ].…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A scoping review of Q-methodology in healthcare research

Churruca

Ludlow

et al. 2021

BMC Med Res Methodol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Q-methodology is an approach to studying complex issues of human ‘subjectivity’. Although this approach was developed in the early twentieth century, the value of Q-methodology in healthcare was not recognised until relatively recently. The aim of this review was to scope the empirical healthcare literature to examine the extent to which Q-methodology has been utilised in healthcare over time, including how it has been used and for what purposes. Methods A search of three electronic databases (Scopus, EBSCO-CINAHL Complete, Medline) was conducted. No date restriction was applied. A title and abstract review, followed by a full-text review, was conducted by a team of five reviewers. Included articles were English-language, peer-reviewed journal articles that used Q-methodology (both Q-sorting and inverted factor analysis) in healthcare settings. The following data items were extracted into a purpose-designed Excel spreadsheet: study details (e.g., setting, country, year), reasons for using Q-methodology, healthcare topic area, participants (type and number), materials (e.g., ranking anchors and Q-set), methods (e.g., development of the Q-set, analysis), study results, and study implications. Data synthesis was descriptive in nature and involved frequency counting, open coding and the organisation by data items. Results Of the 2,302 articles identified by the search, 289 studies were included in this review. We found evidence of increased use of Q-methodology in healthcare, particularly over the last 5 years. However, this research remains diffuse, spread across a large number of journals and topic areas. In a number of studies, we identified limitations in the reporting of methods, such as insufficient information on how authors derived their Q-set, what types of analyses they performed, and the amount of variance explained. Conclusions Although Q-methodology is increasingly being adopted in healthcare research, it still appears to be relatively novel. This review highlight commonalities in how the method has been used, areas of application, and the potential value of the approach. To facilitate reporting of Q-methodological studies, we present a checklist of details that should be included for publication.

show abstract

“…Q methodology combines both quantitative and qualitative analysis (Shabila et al, 2014), exploring the rich subjective viewpoints of participants and arranging them into shared accounts or stories (Spurgeon, Humphreys, James & Sackley, 2012). Q methodology is apt for understanding experiences of illness and healthcare (Bang, Yun, Ham, Jeon & An, 2016;Herron-Marx, Williams & Hicks, 2007;Merrick & Farrell, 2012;Stainton Rogers, 1991), as it provides insight into "life as lived from the standpoint of the person living it" (Brown, 1996, p. 561). The Q literature includes studies in which theoretical models have been related to participants' viewpoints (e.g., Jeffares & Skelcher, 2011).…”

Section: Q Methodologymentioning

confidence: 99%

An Exploratory Study into the Traumatic Impact of Advanced Cancer among Patients and Partners

Broderick¹,

Deignan²,

Combes³

2017

osub

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

People living with cancer may experience both psychological distress and a sense of personal development. These two responses can be conceptualised using theories of post-traumatic stress (PTS) and post-traumatic growth (PTG), respectively. This hospice-based study investigated the range of experiences of people living with advanced cancer and of their partners, with consideration of how theories of PTS and PTG resonated with their accounts. Strategic sampling (n=11) was used to gather data from eight individuals living with advanced cancer and from three individuals caring for someone with the diagnosis. Q methodology was used to investigate the participants' subjective experiences. A set of 62 statements, informed by theories of trauma, were sorted by the participants according to the extent to which the individual statements were consistent with their personal experiences of living with cancer. The participants were then interviewed about their Q sorts, to consider the personal meanings that had informed their statement rankings. The Q sort data were factor analysed, and theories of PTS and PTG were used to aid the interpretation of four differing viewpoints: "Accepting and Growing," "Fearful yet Adapting," "Resigned and Grieving" and "Traumatised." These different expressions of the positive and negative feelings associated with living with advanced cancer are considered in relation to professional healthcare provision. The study recommends that future research involve a broader sample of individuals, including patients not accessing hospice care, the partners of this population and cancer healthcare professionals.

show abstract

Perceptions about cancer-related fatigue among cancer patients using Q methodology

Cited by 10 publications

References 27 publications

Quality of life, fatigue and changes therein as predictors of return to work during breast cancer treatment

Quality of life, fatigue and changes therein as predictors of return to work during breast cancer treatment

A scoping review of Q-methodology in healthcare research

An Exploratory Study into the Traumatic Impact of Advanced Cancer among Patients and Partners

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About