Measuring Caregiving Appraisal

Clicks: 2
ID: 306732
1989
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score — reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
Emerging

Ranked #19 of 30 articles by views in international journal of gerontology

Most read Least read

Bar heights use a square-root scale.

Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet minted

Create a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.

5 SUSD one-off · no wallet required
Abstract
Caregivers of disabled older people were studied in terms of their appraisal of the caregiving process. A conceptual approach based on stress theory suggested that such appraisal was broader than the traditional term, "caregiving burden." An item pool was constructed using traditional and new items to represent dimensions of subjective caregiving burden, caregiving satisfaction, caregiving impact, caregiving mastery, and traditional caregiving ideology. Component analysis of responses of 632 caregivers in a respite research project yielded factors that corresponded with those hypothesized; the content of similar factored responses from 239 caregivers in another study was quite similar. A series of exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses resulted in acceptance of the subjective burden, caregiving satisfaction, and caregiving impact factors. Used as composite item scores, evidence of their psychometric quality is presented.
Reference Key
openalex_W1996321594 Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors M. P. Lawton, Morton H. Kleban, Miriam S. Moss, Michael J. Rovine, Allen Glicksman
Journal international journal of gerontology
Year 1989
DOI
10.1093/geronj/44.3.p61
URL
Keywords Keywords not found

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.