MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407592981 · doi:10.15386/mpr-2816

Assessing the quality of life of schizophrenia patients and their family caregivers in a Romanian sample: the role of clinical, sociocultural, and demographic factors

2025· article· en· W4407592981 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jes Sebastian Denis Völker, I. Micluția

Bibliographic record

VenueMedicine and Pharmacy Reports · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicFamily Caregiving in Mental Illness
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSchizophrenia (object-oriented programming)Biopsychosocial modelSocioeconomic statusQuality of life (healthcare)Mental healthPsychologyClinical psychologyPsychological interventionPsychiatryBeck Depression InventoryGerontologyMedicinePopulationAnxiety

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Schizophrenia is a chronic mental health disorder significantly impacting the Quality of Life (QOL) of both patients and their family caregivers. In Romania, approximately 193,000 individuals are affected by schizophrenia, with most relying on non-professional family caregivers. These caregivers face substantial psychological, physical, financial, and social challenges, which remain understudied and often overlooked by health policymakers. This research employs a biopsychosocial framework to explore the interconnected clinical, cognitive, and sociocultural factors influencing the QOL of schizophrenia patients and their caregivers. Objectives: This study aims to assess the QOL of schizophrenia patients and their family caregivers in a Romanian sample, focusing on key determinants such as social support, financial stressors, and caregiving burden, to provide insights for interventions and possibly policy development. Methods: This cross-sectional study included 156 individuals: 52 schizophrenia patient-family caregiver pairs (n = 104) and a control group of 52 participants recruited from an occupational health clinic. The control group was matched with the patient-caregiver pairs on demographic characteristics, including age, gender, education, and socioeconomic status. Controls were selected to reflect similar socioeconomic and health-related challenges but excluded individuals with a history of mental health disorders. Schizophrenia diagnoses were established using ICD-10 criteria (F20.0-9). QOL was assessed using the Heinrichs-Carpenter Quality of Life Scale (QLS) exclusively for schizophrenia patients, while the WHOQOL-BREF was administered to all participants to ensure comparability. Additional assessments included the Beck Depression Inventory (BDI) for depressive symptoms, the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) for cognitive functioning, the Eppendorf Schizophrenia Inventory (ESI) for caregiver psychopathology, and the Global Assessment of Functioning (GAF) scale to measure functional status. Results: Caregivers exhibited elevated depressive symptoms, with a mean Beck Depression Inventory (BDI) score of 25 (≥20 indicates moderate depression), highlighting the significant psychological burden associated with caregiving. In contrast, the control group had a mean BDI score of 15, below the clinical threshold. Additionally, caregivers demonstrated reduced cognitive functioning, with a mean Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) score of 24, compared to 28 in the control group (<26 suggests mild cognitive impairment). These findings underscore the biopsychosocial stressors faced by caregivers. Conclusions: This study highlights the significant cognitive, psychological, and sociocultural burdens associated with schizophrenia for patients and caregivers, advancing understanding of these challenges in a Romanian context. By emphasizing the need for integrated, culturally sensitive care models, our findings offer actionable insights to inform national and international mental health policies and future research on caregiver support and QOL enhancement.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.048
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.083
GPT teacher head0.431
Teacher spread0.348 · 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedicine and Pharmacy ReportsSame topicFamily Caregiving in Mental IllnessFrench-language works237,207