
doi: 10.1002/pon.5748
pmid: 34106498
AbstractBackgroundModels of fear of cancer recurrence or progression (FCR/P) suggest that the way in which people interpret ambiguous physical symptoms is an important contributor to the development and maintenance of FCR/P, but research has not investigated this claim. The aim of this study is to fill that gap.MethodsThis was a cross‐sectional study. Sixty‐two women with ovarian cancer reported completed measures of FCR/P, an interpretation bias task and a symptom checklist. The healthy control group (n = 96) completed the interpretation bias task.ResultsWomen with ovarian cancer were more likely to interpret ambiguous words as health‐related compared to healthy women (p < 0.001; Cohen's d = 1.28). In women with cancer, FCR/P was associated with overall symptom burden (r = 0.25; p = 0.04) and interpretation bias score (r = 0.41; p = 0.001), but interpretation bias and symptom burden were not related (r = 0.22; p = 0.09). Interpretation bias did not moderate the relationship between symptoms and FCR/P.ConclusionsWe found that women with ovarian cancer interpreted ambiguous words as health related more often compared to women without cancer, and this bias was greater for women with higher FCR/P. Symptom burden was also associated with FCR/P. However, interpretation bias did not moderate the relationship between physical symptoms and FCR/P. Hence, the central tenet of the Cancer Threat Interpretation model was not supported in women with ovarian cancer.
Ovarian Neoplasms, Cross-Sectional Studies, Bias, Cancer Survivors, Humans, Female, Fear, Neoplasm Recurrence, Local
Ovarian Neoplasms, Cross-Sectional Studies, Bias, Cancer Survivors, Humans, Female, Fear, Neoplasm Recurrence, Local
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 16 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Average | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% |
