Skip to main content
. 2012 May 20;12:184. doi: 10.1186/1471-2407-12-184

Table 7.

Results of quantitative studies examining effects of stigma-related negative evaluations on psychosocial outcomes

Study Participants Study Factor(s) Outcome Main findings
LoConte 2008: Else-Quest 2009, USA
Stage IV NSCLC
 
 
Association between stigma or self blame and outcomes
Perceived stigma
(1 item)
Self esteem (RSES)
NS**
Direct effect
p< 0.01# Negative association
Indirect effects via self-blame (SSGS)
 
Anxiety (State-Trait Anxiety Inventory)
p< 0.01**Positive association
Direct effect
p< 0.05# Positive association
Indirect effects via self-blame (SSGS)
 
Anger (State-Trait Anger Inventory)
p< 0.01** Positive association
Direct effect
p< 0.01# Positive association
Indirect effects via self-blame (SSGS)
 
Depression (shortened CES-D)
p< 0.01** Positive association
Direct effect
p< 0.01# Positive association
Indirect effects via self-blame (SSGS)
 
Self Blame (SSGS) adjusted for perceived stigma
Self esteem (RSES)
p< 0.01** Negative association
Anxiety (State-Trait Anxiety Inventory)
p< 0.01** Positive association
Anger (State-Trait Anger Inventory)
p< 0.01** Positive association
Depression (shortened CES-D)
p< 0.01** Positive association
Cataldo 2011, USA
All types and stages of lung cancer
 
 
 
Lung cancer stigma scale (Cataldo scale - 43 items)
Depression (CES-D)
p< 0.01* Positive association
Quality of life (Quality of Life Inventory)
p< 0.01* Negative association
Self esteem (RSES)
p< 0.01* Negative association
Social support (Social Support Indices)
 
Availability
p< 0.01* Negative association
Validation
p< 0.01* Negative association
Subjective social integration (Social Support Indices)
p< 0.01* Negative association
Social conflict (Social Support Indices)
p< 0.01* Positive association
Lung cancer stigma scale Stigma and shame subscale (19 items)
Depression (CES-D)
p< 0.01* Positive association
Quality of life (Quality of Life Inventory)
p< 0.01* Negative association
Self esteem (RSES)
p< 0.01* Negative association
Social support (Social Support Indices)
 
Availability
p< 0.01* Negative association
Validation
p< 0.01* Negative association
Subjective social integration (Social Support Indices)
p< 0.01* Negative association
Social conflict (Social Support Indices)
p< 0.01* Positive association
Devitt 2010, Victoria, Australia
42% Stage IV 74% NSCLC
Shame about lung cancer
Participation in a support group
10% of patients reported shame as a potential barrier
29% of support group facilitators thought patients’ shame was a potential barrier
Lobchuk 2008b, Canada
Primary caregivers of lung cancer patients
 
 
Correlation between caregiver blame and caregiver assistance
58% advanced disease
Primary caregiver blame re patient’s efforts to control the disease (single item)
Primary caregiver assistance in coping with lung cancer and its symptoms (single item)
r = 0.044, p = 0.66
76% NSCLC
 
Siminoff 2010, USA, Ohio Stage III or IV NSCLC Family blames cancer on the patient
 
Regression coefficient for blame and depression
Patient agrees
Patient Depression (CES-D)
 
Familial cohesion
 
p< 0.051 Positive association
Familial expressiveness
p< 0.052 Positive association
Familial conflict
p< 0.053 Positive association
Caregiver agrees
Patient Depression (CES-D)  
Familial cohesion
p< 0.051 Positive association
Familial expressiveness
p< 0.052 Positive association
Familial conflict p< 0.053 Positive association

ECOG = Eastern Co-operative Oncology Group; NSCLC = Non small cell lung cancer; SCLC = Small cell lung cancer; SSGS = State Shame and Guilt Scale; CES-D = Center for Epidemiological Studies Depression Scale; NA = Not applicable; NS = Not statistically significantly different; RSES = Rosenberg’s Self-Esteem Scale; r = correlation coefficient; * Two-sided test; ** Multiple regression analyses; # bootstrapping; 1 Multi-level model including age, gender, physical health, relationship of caregiver to patient, familial cohesion; 2 Multi-level model including age, gender, physical health, relationship of caregiver to patient, familial expressiveness; 3 Multi-level model including age, gender, physical health, relationship of caregiver to patient, familial.