| Title |
Screening for caregivers at risk: Extended validation of the short version of the Burden Scale for Family Caregivers (BSFC-s) with a valid classification system for caregivers caring for an older person at home
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Health Services Research, April 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12913-018-3047-4 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Anna Pendergrass, Cintia Malnis, Uta Graf, Sabine Engel, Elmar Graessel |
| Abstract |
Informal caregivers' (CGs') subjective burden is an important aspect of the care situation because it is linked to various outcomes such as health, mortality risk, institutionalization, and caregiving style. The aims of this study were a) to examine the convergent and discriminant validity of the 10-item short version of the Burden Scale for Family Caregivers (BSFC-s) and b) to develop a valid classification system for interpreting BSFC-s scores. In this cross-sectional study, we analyzed data obtained from 386 informal CGs who applied for an initial grade or upgrade of the care level for the care recipient at the Medical Service of Compulsory Health Insurance Funds of Bavaria (Germany). To validate the BSFC-s, we analyzed the reliability and the convergent/discriminant validity. We calculated correlations with the short form of the Giessen Symptom Complaints List (GBB-24), the Caregiver Strain Index (CSI), the personal further development sub-scale of the Berlin Inventory of Caregivers' Burden with Dementia Patients (BIZA-D), and other scales for establishing informal CGs' situations. To develop the classification system, we compared the percentile ranks of the GBB-24 with the respective BSFC-s sum scores and their distributions and derived three classification categories. Results confirmed the convergent and discriminant validity of the BSFC-s (GBB-24: r = 0.68; CSI: r = 0.70; BIZA-D: r = 0.16; p < 0.001). For informal CGs with low subjective burden, the risk of physical psychosomatic complaints was elevated to a less than average level (BSFC-s scores of 0-4). In those with a moderate subjective burden (BSFC-s scores of 5-14), the risk was elevated. In those with a high burden (BSFC-s scores of 15-30), the risk was substantially elevated. The BSFC-s is a valid scale for measuring subjective burden in informal CGs. The risk of physical psychosomatic complaints, which is a consequence of subjective CG burden, can be determined by using the valid classification system to deduce the necessity for action and to give concrete recommendations for interventions. The BSFC-s should therefore be employed as a screening instrument in medical contexts and in counseling services for informal CGs. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 163 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 163 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 21 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 20 | 12% |
| Researcher | 15 | 9% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 9 | 6% |
| Lecturer | 8 | 5% |
| Other | 24 | 15% |
| Unknown | 66 | 40% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Nursing and Health Professions | 28 | 17% |
| Psychology | 16 | 10% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 13 | 8% |
| Neuroscience | 6 | 4% |
| Arts and Humanities | 5 | 3% |
| Other | 18 | 11% |
| Unknown | 77 | 47% |
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 13 April 2018.
All research outputs
#20,481,952
of 23,043,346 outputs
Outputs from BMC Health Services Research
#7,183
of 7,718 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#290,426
of 328,968 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Health Services Research
#191
of 210 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,043,346 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 7,718 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.8. 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 328,968 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 210 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.