Influencing factors and predictive model construction of anxiety and depression in patients with cervical cancer

Table 1 Univariate analysis of anxiety and depression in cervical cancer patients (n = 119), n (%)

Characteristics	Total	Anxiety assessment				Depression assessment
		Has anxiety (n = 77)	No anxiety (n = 42)	χ2	P value	Has depression (n = 62)	No depression (n = 57)	χ2	P value
Age (years)				2.747	0.097			1.780	0.182
< 60	66	47 (61.04)	19 (45.24)			38 (61.29)	28 (59.12)
≥ 60	53	30 (38.96)	23 (54.76)			24 (38.71)	29 (50.88)
Place of residence				0.135	0.713			0.555	0.456
Town/city	48	32 (41.56)	16 (38.10)			27 (43.55)	21 (36.84)
Rural area	71	45 (58.44)	26 (61.90)			35 (56.45)	36 (63.16)
Marital status				1.116	0.291			1.603	0.206
Married	99	62 (80.52)	37 (88.10)			49 (79.03)	50 (87.72)
Unmarried or divorced	20	15 (19.48)	5 (11.90)			13 (20.97)	7 (12.28)
Educational level				0.093	0.760			0.018	0.892
High school and below	87	57 (74.03)	30 (71.43)			45 (72.58)	42 (73.68)
College degree or above	32	20 (25.97)	12 (28.57)			17 (27.42)	15 (26.32)
Monthly family income				7.661	0.022			6.849	0.033
< 5000 yuan (RMB)	38	30 (38.96)	8 (19.05)			26 (41.94)	12 (21.05)
5000-8000 yuan (RMB)	54	28 (36.36)	26 (61.90)			22 (35.48)	32 (56.14)
> 8000 yuan (RMB)	27	19 (24.68)	8 (19.05)			14 (22.58)	13 (22.81)
Underlying disease				2.753	0.097			1.303	0.254
Have	24	19 (24.68)	5 (11.90)			15 (24.19)	9 (15.79)
Not have	95	58 (75.32)	37 (88.10)			47 (75.81)	48 (84.21)
Tumor staging				7.581	0.006			4.437	0.035
Phase I-II	59	31 (40.26)	28 (66.67)			25 (40.32)	34 (59.65)
Phase III-IV	60	46 (59.74)	14 (33.33)			37 (59.68)	23 (40.35)
Pathological type				0.627	0.731			1.370	0.504
Adenocarcinoma	24	14 (18.18)	10 (23.81)			10 (16.13)	14 (24.56)
Squamous cell carcinoma	90	60 (77.92)	30 (71.43)			49 (79.03)	41 (71.93)
Adenosquamous carcinoma	5	3 (2.90)	2 (4.76)			3 (4.84)	2 (3.51)
Tumor treatment methods				10.245	0.001			5.147	0.023
Monotherapy1	40	18 (23.38)	22 (52.38)			15 (24.19)	25 (43.86)
Combined treatment2	79	59 (76.62)	20 (47.62)			47 (75.81)	32 (56.14)
Hope level				15.139	0.001			11.783	0.003
Low	50	38 (51.95)	12 (23.81)			33 (53.22)	17 (29.83)
Medium	44	31 (37.66)	13 (35.71)			23 (37.10)	21 (36.84)
High	25	8 (10.39)	17 (40.48)			6 (9.68)	19 (33.33)

¹Indicates single treatment such as surgery alone, radiotherapy alone, or chemotherapy alone.

²It refers to a comprehensive treatment approach that combines surgery and radiotherapy, or surgery and chemotherapy, or surgery and radiotherapy and chemotherapy.

Table 2 Explanation of variable assignment

Variable	Description of valuation
Monthly household income	0 ≥ 8000 yuan; 1 = 5000-8000 yuan; 2 ≤ 5000 yuan
Tumor staging	0 = phase I-II; 1 = phase III-IV
Tumor treatment methods	0 = monotherapy; 1 = combined treatment
Hope level	0 = high; 1 = medium; 2 = low

Table 3 Results of multivariate logistic regression analysis of anxiety in cervical cancer patients

Variable	β	SE	Wald χ2	P value	OR (95%CI)
Family monthly income < 5000 yuan	0.795	0.347	5.249	0.022	2.214 (1.122-4.371)
Tumor stage III-IV	0.594	0.239	6.177	0.013	1.811 (1.134-2.892)
Comprehensive tumor treatment	1.095	0.398	7.569	0.006	2.989 (1.370-6.521)
Low hope level	1.184	0.359	10.877	0.001	3.267 (1.616-6.606)
Constant term	-9.176	2.593	12.523	< 0.001	-

Table 4 Results of multivariate logistic regression analysis of depression in cervical cancer patients

Variable	β	SE	Wald χ2	P value	OR (95%CI)
Family monthly income < 5000 yuan	0.432	0.195	4.908	0.027	1.540 (1.051-2.257)
Tumor stage III-IV	0.518	0.238	4.737	0.030	1.679 (1.053-2.675)
Comprehensive tumor treatment	0.727	0.289	6.328	0.012	2.069 (1.175-3.644)
Low hope level	1.095	0.380	8.303	0.004	2.988 (1.419-6.297)
Constant term	-8.541	2.572	11.027	< 0.001	-