The psychosocial and spiritual experiences of patients with advanced incurable illness in Bangladesh: A cross-sectional observational study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
CONTEXT: The psychosocial and spiritual needs of individuals with life-limiting conditions in low- or middle-income countries have not been well described. Understanding these needs is important to providing holistic palliative care. AIM: This study aims to better understand the psychosocial and spiritual needs and supports of patients with advanced, incurable illness in Bangladesh. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Individuals with advanced incurable illnesses (advanced cancer and HIV/AIDS) from a wide geographical distribution across Bangladesh were interviewed about their health status, emotional and spiritual experiences with their illness, coping and support systems, and greatest needs and fears. RESULTS: We interviewed 221 individuals with incurable cancer (82%) or HIV/AIDS (18%). Self-reported health status was poor or very poor for 48%, and 44% reported feeling unhappy all of the time. The majority (61%) rated their current level of unhappiness as 10/10. Spouses (50%), children (15%), and parents (13%) were the most common caregivers. Money and medical care were equally the most common needs (46%). Participants' greatest fears were for the future of their children (38%), being in pain (29%), and dying (28%). CONCLUSIONS: There is a significant burden of psychosocial and spiritual concerns among patients with advanced incurable illness in Bangladesh, with sadness being very frequent and of high intensity. Family and friends provide significant emotional and practical support to patients who are seriously ill, but very few patients access any professional support for these concerns.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".