MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414459577 · doi:10.1186/s12877-025-06227-7

Prevalence and determinants of quality of life among Rohingya older adults residing in the refugee camp in Bangladesh

2025· article· en· W4414459577 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Afsana Anwar, Gülşah Kurt, Uday Narayan Yadav, Md. Nazmul Huda, Saruna Ghimire, Shovon Bhattacharjee, Amit Arora, ARM Mehrab Ali, Probal Kumar Mondal, Abu Ansar Md Rizwan, Suvasish Das Shuvo, Sabuj Kanti Mistry

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Geriatrics · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicMigration, Health and Trauma
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRefugeeOddsQuality of life (healthcare)Logistic regressionMultivariate analysisOdds ratioQuarter (Canadian coin)Cross-sectional study

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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.

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 score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.746

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.349
Teacher spread0.320 · 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

Citations3
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC GeriatricsSame topicMigration, Health and TraumaFrench-language works237,207