Death anxiety in patients with primary brain tumor: Measurement, prevalence, and determinants
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: This study investigated death anxiety in patients with primary brain tumor (PBT). We examined the psychometric properties of two validated death anxiety measures and determined the prevalence and possible determinants of death anxiety in this often-overlooked population. METHODS: Two cross-sectional studies in neuro-oncology were conducted. In Study 1, 81 patients with PBT completed psychological questionnaires, including the Templer Death Anxiety Scale (DAS). In Study 2, 109 patients with PBT completed similar questionnaires, including the Death and Dying Distress Scale (DADDS). Medical and disease-specific variables were collected across participants in both studies. Psychometric properties, including construct validity, internal consistency, and concurrent validity, were investigated. Levels of distress were analyzed using frequencies, and determinants of death anxiety were identified using logistic regression. RESULTS: The DADDS was more psychometrically sound than the DAS in patients with PBT. Overall, 66% of PBT patients endorsed at least one symptom of distress about death and dying, with 48% experiencing moderate-severe death anxiety. Generalized anxiety symptoms and the fear of recurrence significantly predicted death anxiety. SIGNIFICANCE OF RESULTS: The DADDS is a more appropriate instrument than the DAS to assess death anxiety in neuro-oncology. The proportion of patients with PBT who experience death anxiety appears to be higher than in other advanced cancer populations. Death anxiety is a highly distressing symptom, especially when coupled with generalized anxiety and fears of disease progression, which appears to be the case in patients with PBT. Our findings call for routine monitoring and the treatment of death anxiety in neuro-oncology.
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".