Cited by 36Palliative Care and End-of-Life IssuesPalliative and Oncologic CareReligion, Spirituality, and Psychology

Prevalence and factors associated with demoralization syndrome in patients with advanced disease: results from a cross-sectional Portuguese study

Open access
Julião, Miguel, Nunes, Baltazar, Barbosa, António·2016·Palliative and Supportive Care

Abstract

Background: Demoralization syndrome (DS) within the context of the psychological experience at the end of life is an important and relevant medical issue and remains the subject of a growing area of research. Method: Ours was a cross-sectional study designed to assess the prevalence and associated demographic, physical, psychiatric, and psychosocial factors for demoralization syndrome in Portuguese patients with advanced disease. Results: Some 80 terminally ill patients were included in the analyses over a 28-month period of time. The prevalence of DS was found to be 52.5%. No statistical differences were observed among prevalence of DS within categories of all studied variables, with the exception of depression using DSM–IV criteria (prevalence ratio PR = 1.8, CI95% = [1.18–2.74]) and desire for death (PR = 1.8, CI95% = [1.25–2.56]). In the Poisson regression analyses predicting DS, none of the latter factors emerged as significant (DSM–IV criteria: PR = 1.6, CI95% = [0.84–3.08]; and desire for death: PR = 1.5, CI95% = [0.74–2.99]). Thirty percent of participants met both criteria for demoralization syndrome and depression using the DSM–IV. Significance of Results: Prevalence of demoralization syndrome was high in this patient sample. Based on our results, we cannot determine if DS and depression are two distinct psychological entities. Identifying factors associated with DS could help provide efficacious interventions capable of diminishing suffering in terminally ill patients.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1017/s1478951515001364

Cites

21 of 21 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Julião, M., Nunes, B., & Barbosa, A.
Affiliations
University of Lisbon (PT)
Corresponding author
Julião, Miguel
Venue
Palliative and Supportive Care
Published
2016-01-06
Volume
14
Issue
5
Pages
468-473
ISSN
  • 1478-9515 (ISSN-L)
  • 1478-9523
OpenAlex
W2467323865
Cited by
36
References
21
Citations by year
2025: 4 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 3
FWCI
2.98
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Palliative & Supportive Care (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Portuguese National Funding Agency for Science, Research and Technology (RCAAP Project by FCT) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Palliative Care and End-of-Life Issues
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Palliative and Oncologic Care
  • Social Sciences › Health › Religion, Spirituality, and Psychology
Keywords
demoralization syndrome, advanced disease, dying patients, depression, desire for death, prevalence, risk factors, psychosocial factors, palliative care
MeSH terms
Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Cross-Sectional Studies, Depressive Disorder, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Palliative Care, Portugal, Stress, Psychological, Prevalence

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review