Background/Objectives: Greek cancer patients deal with high out-of-pocket medical expenses in comparison with the European Union average. All these high costs affect the quality of life of cancer patients, leading to financial toxicity. The purpose of this study is to investigate the association between financial toxicity and quality of life in patients undergoing cancer treatment. Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted in four hospitals in Greece. The Comprehensive Score for Financial Toxicity (COST) Scale was used for the evaluation of financial toxicity, and the EORTC Core Quality of Life questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30) was used for the assessment of quality of life. Quantitative variables were first tested for normality using the Kolmogorov–Smirnov criterion. Spearman correlation coefficients (rho) were used to explore the association of two continuous variables. Multiple linear regression analysis was used with dependent the QoL subscales. Logarithmic transformations of the QoL scales were used for the regression analyses. Internal consistency reliability was determined by the calculation of Cronbach’s α coefficient. All reported p values are two-tailed. Statistical significance was set at p < 0.05 and analyses were conducted using SPSS statistical software (version 27.0). Results: Greater financial toxicity score, i.e., lower toxicity, was significantly associated with greater global health status (rho = 0.34; p < 0.001) and greater physical (rho = 0.37; p < 0.001), role (rho = 0.17; p = 0.001), emotional (rho = 0.34; p < 0.001), cognitive (rho = 0.22; p < 0.001), and social (rho = 0.27; p < 0.001) functioning. Conclusions: There is a strong correlation between a greater financial toxicity score and the quality of life of Greek cancer patients, meaning the lower their financial toxicity, the better their quality of life.

Introduction: Health equity continues to be an obstacle in Greece. The EU Cancer Inequalities Registry indicates that social determinants of health significantly influence the cancer burden in Greece, thus affecting quality of life.Methods: This was a cross-sectional study; the Social Capital Questionnaire Greek version was used for the evaluation of individual social capital, and the EORTC Core Quality of Life questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30) was used for the assessment of quality of life. The Kolmogorov–Smirnov test was used for checking the normality distribution of the quantitative variables. Quantitative variables were expressed as mean values (Standard Deviation) and as median (interquartile range), while categorical variables were expressed as absolute and relative frequencies. The association between QoL and Social capital scales was checked via Spearman correlation coefficients (rho).Results: Greater total score in Social capital scale was significantly associated with greater overall QoL (β = 0.005; p < 0.001), better Emotional functioning (β = 0.004; p = 0.004) and better Social functioning (β = 0.009; p = 0.002),with lower Nausea and vomiting (β = −0.017; p = 0.015), Insomnia (β = −0.014; p = 0.002), Appetite loss (β = −0.010; p = 0.018) and Constipation symptoms (β = −0.009; p = 0.047).Conclusion: There was a strong association between a greater social capital score and the quality of life of Greek cancer patients, indicating that higher levels of social capital are associated with improved quality of life.

Background: The pandemic has increased the rates of violent behavior towards women by their partners worldwide. Increased time spent living with the abusive partner, working at home and limited social contact combined with socioeconomic characteristics contributed to the increase in this type of violence. Objective: To investigate the impact of pandemic COVID-19 and social determinants of health (SDOH) on the intimate partner violence (IPV) experienced by women from their partners. Methods: A systematic review was conducted to investigate the impact of COVID-19 and social determinants of health on violence experienced by women from their partner(s) as a consequence of incarceration. The Pubmed and Scopus databases were searched during December 2022, using the keywords “intimate partner violence”, “women”, “COVID-19”, “socioeconomic factors”, “social determinants of health”. Results: Of the 917 studies initially retrieved, 38 studies found an increased prevalence of women’s reported violence by their partners, 10 found a low prevalence, and 9 found no difference in prevalence before and during restraint. The most common forms of violence were psychological, physical and sexual. In 30 studies, social determinants such as socioeconomic level, education and living conditions were found to be associated with the prevalence of violence. Conclusion: There was an increase in violence against women during quarantine which was associated with the effect of social determinants. However, due to research limitations of the studies, additional research is needed to draw firm conclusions that can be generalized to the population.

Quality of life is shaped not only by disease, symptoms, and treatment but also by the social conditions in which adults live, work, age, and manage health. This chapter examines how social determinants of health influence quality of life through structural, material, psychosocial, behavioral, and healthcare-access pathways. It distinguishes broader social determinants from individual health-related social needs and uses a life-course perspective to explain how education, employment, housing, caregiving, financial security, social relationships, discrimination, functional ability, and access to services affect well-being from young adulthood to older age. Chronic conditions illustrate the reciprocal relationship between social disadvantage and disease, including financial toxicity, treatment burden, and disruption of family and occupational roles. The chapter also considers implications for respectful social assessment, interdisciplinary care, healthcare-system adaptation, community partnerships, and policy action. Improving quality of life across adulthood requires clinically effective care to be accompanied by sustained action on the unequal distribution of resources, opportunities, and social protection.

Background/Objectives: Although the Robin Hood Index (RHI) is increasingly used to quantify geographic health inequality and guide resource redistribution, empirical evidence on whether higher physician density reduces RHI-measured inequality remains limited. This study systematically reviews and meta-analyzes RHI-based research to assess the association between physician distribution and health inequalities. Methods: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies using the RHI to evaluate health inequalities, without restrictions on country or publication date. Following PRISMA 2020 guidelines and registered in PROSPERO (CRD42024496486), we searched PubMed, Scopus, and OpenGrey literature, extracted data on physician density and RHI outcomes, and conducted a meta-analysis. Odds ratios (ORs), ln(OR), and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated, and risk of bias was assessed using the Robvis tool. Results: Seventeen studies covering 720 regions and 1.07 billion individuals were included. Three clusters emerged: physician redistribution (10 studies), poverty–mortality associations (six studies), and systematic reviews (one study). Physician redistribution was strongly associated with increased inequality and policy attention (r = 0.73; p = 0.0038). Meta-analysis of eight redistribution studies yielded a pooled OR of 1.24 (95% CI: 0.54–2.86), consistent in sensitivity analysis (OR = 1.26; 95% CI: 0.56–2.89). Poverty–mortality studies also showed a correlation with the number of variables considered (r = 0.59; p = 0.022). Conclusions: A greater physician supply is associated with increased health inequalities, with statistical support but limited certainty. Methodological heterogeneity in RHI-based studies constrains comparability. Standardized methodologies and broader analytic models are needed to inform research and guide health policy.

Background: Specialist palliative care remains highly uneven in rural and remote settings for patients with life-limiting illness and their families . This review aimed to examine the implementation characteristics, clinical and service-level outcomes, and patient experiences of tele-palliative care interventions for individuals living in rural or remote settings with limited access to specialist palliative care. Methods: A systematic review was conducted in accordance with the PRISMA 2020 guidelines across PubMed, Scopus, CINAHL, and Google Scholar (August-October 2025). Eligible studies were published within the past 20 years and evaluated tele-palliative care interventions among rural populations. Data were extracted and outcomes were narratively synthesized. Results: Thirteen primary studies were included, conducted in the United States (n = 8), Australia (n = 2), Canada (n = 1), Japan (n = 1), and England (n = 1). Interventions included video consultations, hybrid tele-palliative programs, and remote symptom monitoring. Across studies, reported outcomes included implementation and process outcomes, patient and caregiver experiences and communication outcomes, clinical and care-process outcomes and health service utilization and economic outcomes. Challenges included technological instability, internet access limitations and inconsistent implementation fidelity. Conclusions: Tele-palliative care can extend specialist palliative care to rural and remote communities by reducing travel burden and supporting continuity, particularly when delivered through hybrid models embedded in local care pathways. However, the evidence base remains limited and concentrated in high-income settings, with heterogeneity in intervention models and outcome reporting. Future studies should use standardized implementation outcomes, evaluate equity impacts, and compare hybrid tele-palliative models with usual care in diverse rural contexts.