MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4321110306 · doi:10.3389/fpubh.2023.972360

Prevalence and associated factors of depression and anxiety among patients with cancer seeking treatment at the Butaro Cancer Center of Excellence in Rwanda

2023· article· en· W4321110306 on OpenAlexaff
Samuel Habimana, Emmanuel Biracyaza, Tharcisse Mpunga, Epaphrodite Nsabimana, Florence Kayitesi, Pascal Nzamwita, Stefan Jansen

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Public Health · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer survivorship and care
Canadian institutionsHealth Care FoundationUniversité de Montréal
FundersUniversity of Rwanda
KeywordsAnxietyMedicineDepression (economics)Odds ratioLogistic regressionCancerPsychiatryCross-sectional studyBreast cancerInternal medicinePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background Depression and anxiety are psychological and physiological disturbances persisting in cancer patients with high prevalence worldwide, particularly in low- and middle-income countries, due to complexities of determinants of health including biological, individual, socio-cultural, and treatment-related characteristics. Although depression and anxiety have an enormous impact on adherence, length of stay at the hospital, quality of life, and treatment outcomes, studies on psychiatric disorders remain limited. Thus, this study determined the prevalence and factors of depression and anxiety among patients with cancer in Rwanda. Methods A cross-sectional study was conducted among 425 patients with cancer from the Butaro Cancer Center of Excellence. We administered socio-demographic questionnaires and psychometric instruments. Bivariate logistic regressions were computed to identify significant factors to be exported into the multivariate logistic models. Then, odds ratios and their 95% confidence intervals were applied, and statistical significance at p < 0.05 were considered to confirm significant associations. Results The prevalence of depression and anxiety was 42.6 and 40.9%, respectively. Patients with cancer initiated to chemotherapy had a greater likelihood of being depressed [AOR = 2.06; 95% CI (1.11–3.79)] than those initiated to chemotherapy and counseling. Breast cancer was significantly associated with a greater risk of depression [AOR = 2.07, 95% CI (1.01–4.22)] than Hodgikins's Lymphoma cancer. Furthermore, patients with depression had greater odds of developing anxiety [AOR = 1.76, 95% CI (1.01–3.05)] than those with no depression. Those suffering from depression were almost two times more likely to experience anxiety [AOR = 1.76; 95% CI (1.01–3.05)] than their counterparts. Conclusion Our results revealed that depressive and anxious symptomatology is a health threat in clinical settings that requires enhancement of clinical monitoring and prioritization of mental health in cancer health facilities. Designing biopsychosocial interventions to address associated factors needs special attention to promote the health and wellbeing of patients with cancer.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.992

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.019
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.256 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations27
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in Public HealthSame topicCancer survivorship and careFrench-language works237,207