↓ Skip to main content

Internal resources among informal caregivers: trajectories and associations with well-being

Overview of attention for article published in Quality of Life Research, July 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
19 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
74 Mendeley
Title
Internal resources among informal caregivers: trajectories and associations with well-being
Published in
Quality of Life Research, July 2017
DOI 10.1007/s11136-017-1647-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kristin Litzelman, Gina Tesauro, Rebecca Ferrer

Abstract

The experiences, skills, and internal resources that informal caregivers bring into their role may play a critical part in their mental health and well-being. This study examined how caregiver internal resources changed over a 10 year period, and how this was related to caregivers' well-being. Data are from the Midlife in the United States (MIDUS) study, a national sample of adults, at two time points: 1995-1996 (T1) and 2004-2006 (T2). We identified subjects who reported being a caregiver at T2 and starting care after T1 (mean age = 56; 65% female). We examined internal resources: sense of control (personal mastery); primary and secondary control strategies (persistence in goal striving, positive reappraisal, and lowering expectations); and social support seeking, and psychological and subjective well-being. We evaluated how internal resources changed over time, and how these trajectories were associated with well-being at T2 using multivariable linear regressions. Most caregivers had stable levels of internal resources (between 4 and 13% showed an increase or decrease). Caregivers with increasing or high-stable levels of personal mastery had significantly better well-being scores on 6 out of 8 subscales compared with low-stable levels [effect sizes (ES) between 0.39 and 0.79]. Increasing persistence was associated with better personal growth and environmental mastery (ES = 0.96 and 0.91), and increasing and high-stable positive reappraisals were associated with better affect (ES = 0.63 and 0.48) compared with low-stable levels. Lowering aspirations and support seeking were not associated with well-being outcomes. Practices or interventions that support or improve internal resources could potentially improve caregiver well-being.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 74 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 74 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 10 14%
Student > Master 8 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 5%
Researcher 4 5%
Other 12 16%
Unknown 28 38%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 19 26%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 9%
Social Sciences 5 7%
Medicine and Dentistry 4 5%
Unspecified 3 4%
Other 4 5%
Unknown 32 43%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 11 November 2017.
All research outputs
#20,451,991
of 23,007,887 outputs
Outputs from Quality of Life Research
#2,652
of 2,915 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#274,968
of 315,212 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Quality of Life Research
#79
of 80 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,007,887 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,915 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.6. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 315,212 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 80 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.