| Title |
Measuring the impact of informal elderly caregiving: a systematic review of tools
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Quality of Life Research, October 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11136-015-1159-4 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Isabel Mosquera, Itziar Vergara, Isabel Larrañaga, Mónica Machón, María del Río, Carlos Calderón |
| Abstract |
To classify and identify the main characteristics of the tools used in practice to assess the impact of elderly caregiving on the informal carers' life. A systematic review of literature was performed searching in Embase, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, IBECS, LILACS, SiiS, SSCI and Cochrane Library from 2009 to 2013 in English, Spanish, Portuguese and French, and in reference lists of included papers. The review included 79 studies, among them several in languages other than English. Their inclusion increased the variety of identified tools to measure this impact (n = 93) and allowed a wider analysis of their geographical use. While confirming their overlapping nature, instruments were classified according to the degree of integration of dimensions they evaluated and their specificity to the caregiving process: caregiver burden (n = 20), quality of life and well-being (n = 11), management and coping (n = 21), emotional and mental health (n = 29), psychosocial impact (n = 10), physical health and healthy habits (n = 2), and other measures. A high use in practice of tools not validated yet and not caregiver-specific was identified. The great variety and characteristics of instruments identified in this review confirm the complexity and multidimensionality of the effects of elderly caregiving on the informal carer's life and explain the difficulties to assess these effects in practice. According to the classification provided, caregiver burden and emotional and mental health are the most evaluated dimensions. However, further work is required to develop integrated and caregiving focused procedures that can appraise this complexity across different countries and cultures. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 10 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 7 | 70% |
| El Salvador | 1 | 10% |
| Unknown | 2 | 20% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 8 | 80% |
| Scientists | 2 | 20% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 224 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Malaysia | 1 | <1% |
| Spain | 1 | <1% |
| Netherlands | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 221 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 35 | 16% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 27 | 12% |
| Researcher | 26 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 20 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 19 | 8% |
| Other | 34 | 15% |
| Unknown | 63 | 28% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Nursing and Health Professions | 43 | 19% |
| Social Sciences | 30 | 13% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 30 | 13% |
| Psychology | 18 | 8% |
| Neuroscience | 5 | 2% |
| Other | 24 | 11% |
| Unknown | 74 | 33% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 14 September 2017.
All research outputs
#4,653,191
of 22,830,751 outputs
Outputs from Quality of Life Research
#417
of 2,846 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#62,907
of 280,050 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Quality of Life Research
#10
of 72 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,830,751 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 79th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,846 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its peers.
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 280,050 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 72 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.