Prevalence and determinants of quality of life among Rohingya older adults residing in the refugee camp in Bangladesh
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: Ensuring a good quality of life (QOL) among older refugees is a critical yet underexplored aspect of humanitarian support. Older adults in refugee settings often face unmet basic and healthcare needs, which adversely impact their QOL. This study examines the level of QOL and its determinants among older adults residing in Rohingya refugee camp in Bangladesh. METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted in five sub-camps of Rohingya refugee camp in Cox’s Bazar, Bangladesh, between November and December 2021. The study participants were older adults (≥ 60 years), and data were collected using face-to-face interviews. QOL was assessed using the Older People’s Quality of Life (OPQOL-brief) tool, and data on socio-demographics, self-reported diseases, and lifestyle factors were collected via a pre-tested questionnaire. Multivariate logistic regression identified factors associated with QOL. RESULTS: Among 864 participants, the majority were male (56.3%), aged 60–69 years (72.3%), and married (79.1%). Approximately three-quarters (71.6%) of participants reported having good QOL. Females (aOR = 0.69, 95% CI: 0.49–0.98), married participants (aOR = 0.48, 95% CI: 0.31–0.74) and those with non-communicable diseases (NCDs) (aOR = 0.54, 95% CI: 0.39–0.75) had significantly lower odds of good QOL than their respective counterparts. Conversely, individuals who were employed (aOR = 3.67, 95% CI: 1.77–7.62), and those living with families (aOR = 1.85, 95% CI: 1.12–3.04) had higher odds of good QOL than their counterparts. CONCLUSION: The study found that more than one quarter of the Rohingya older adults did not exhibit a good quality of life, and females, unemployed, married participants, and those who were not living with families and suffering from NCDs were at risk. Targeted interventions are needed particularly for subgroups such as older females and those with chronic conditions. Policymakers and humanitarian organizations should prioritize strengthening social support, particularly for those living alone, to improve self-sufficiency, emotional well-being, and overall QOL.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».