↓ Skip to main content

The Caregiver Contribution to Heart Failure Self‐Care (CACHS): Further Psychometric Testing of a Novel Instrument

Overview of attention for article published in Research in nursing & health (Online), November 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
66 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Article details
Title
The Caregiver Contribution to Heart Failure Self‐Care (CACHS): Further Psychometric Testing of a Novel Instrument
Published in
Research in nursing & health (Online), November 2016
DOI 10.1002/nur.21775
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Caregivers (CGs) contribute important assistance with heart failure (HF) self-care, including daily maintenance, symptom monitoring, and management. Until CGs' contributions to self-care can be quantified, it is impossible to characterize it, account for its impact on patient outcomes, or perform meaningful cost analyses. The purpose of this study was to conduct psychometric testing and item reduction on the recently developed 34-item Caregiver Contribution to Heart Failure Self-care (CACHS) instrument using classical and item response theory methods. Fifty CGs (mean age 63 years ±12.84; 70% female) recruited from a HF clinic completed the CACHS in 2014 and results evaluated using classical test theory and item response theory. Items would be deleted for low (<.05) or high (>.95) endorsement, low (<.3) or high (>.7) corrected item-total correlations, significant pairwise correlation coefficients, floor or ceiling effects, relatively low latent trait and item information function levels (<1.5 and p > .5), and differential item functioning. After analysis, 14 items were excluded, resulting in a 20-item instrument (self-care maintenance eight items; monitoring seven items; and management five items). Most items demonstrated moderate to high discrimination (median 2.13, minimum .77, maximum 5.05), and appropriate item difficulty (-2.7 to 1.4). Internal consistency reliability was excellent (Cronbach α = .94, average inter-item correlation = .41) with no ceiling effects. The newly developed 20-item version of the CACHS is supported by rigorous instrument development and represents a novel instrument to measure CGs' contribution to HF self-care. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
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 demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 66 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Unknown 66 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 9 14%
Student > Master 7 11%
Lecturer 5 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 8%
Researcher 5 8%
Other 12 18%
Unknown 23 35%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 22 33%
Psychology 4 6%
Medicine and Dentistry 4 6%
Unspecified 2 3%
Computer Science 2 3%
Other 7 11%
Unknown 25 38%
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 17 May 2017.
All research outputs
#31,183,241
of 34,361,833 outputs
Outputs from Research in nursing & health (Online)
#769
of 819 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#271,421
of 304,020 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Research in nursing & health (Online)
#3
of 3 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,361,833 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 819 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.2. 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 304,020 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 3 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.