Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27125282›Full record

ArticleBMC public health2016

Health capability of family caregivers: how different factors interrelate and their respective contributions using a Bayesian approach.

Barbara Bucki, Elisabeth Spitz, Anne-Marie Etienne, Etienne Le Bihan, Michèle Baumann

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC public health, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Financial and Health Barriers and Caregiving-Related Difficulties Among Rural and Urban Caregivers.The Journal of rural health : official journal of the American Rural Health Association and the National Rural Health Care Association · 2018
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Barbara BuckiUniversity of Luxembourg, Research Unit INSIDE, Institute of Health & Behaviour, Maison des Sciences Sociales, Campus Belval, L-4633, Esch-sur-Alzette, Luxembourg.
Elisabeth SpitzUniversity of Lorraine, University Paris Descartes, APEMAC EA4360, Campus du Saulcy, 57006, Metz, France.
Anne-Marie EtienneUnité de psychologie de la santé, Faculté de Psychologie, Logopédie et Sciences de l'Education, University of Liège, 4000, Liège, Belgium.
Etienne Le BihanUniversity of Luxembourg, Research Unit INSIDE, Institute of Health & Behaviour, Maison des Sciences Sociales, Campus Belval, L-4633, Esch-sur-Alzette, Luxembourg.
Michèle BaumannUniversity of Luxembourg, Research Unit INSIDE, Institute of Health & Behaviour, Maison des Sciences Sociales, Campus Belval, L-4633, Esch-sur-Alzette, Luxembourg. michele.baumann@uni.lu.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe lifestyles of family caregivers pose risks to their physical, mental and social health. The capability to stay healthy may be protective in the context of poor socioeconomic conditions and risk behaviours, but the interrelations between its aspects and their respective influences remain unclear. The aim of this study was to evaluate the interrelations between the factors comprising health capability of family caregivers (HCFC) and the respective contributions of its components.

methodsAll stroke patients admitted to all hospitals in Luxembourg were identified by the 'Inspection Générale de la Sécurité Sociale' using the national database system for care expenditure reimbursement, and asked to designate the main person caring for them. Sixty-two caregivers (mean age 59.3 years; 40 women and 22 men) responded face to face, to a questionnaire including 20 items measuring eight aspects of health capability (physical functioning, psychological functioning, lifestyle value, self-efficacy towards the use of health services, family support, social capital, material conditions/sense of security, and satisfaction with the interactions with health services). Using a Bayesian approach, significance values were estimated by comparing the test values to the posterior distribution of the parameters. Structural equation modelling with standard deviations was applied.

resultsFemale family caregivers had lower scores than men in physical and psychological functioning. Family caregivers with the lowest incomes had the least lifestyle value, social capital and material conditions/security. Self-efficacy towards health services increased with age. The material conditions/sense of security factor was positively correlated with almost all the others. The items that impacted health capability factors the most were - for physical functioning - fatigue, and - for family support - feeling abandoned by the family.

conclusionsDuring the chronic phase, relationships between risk behaviours can help guide social and health decision-makers to determine their priorities in improving the lives of family caregivers. Enhancing health capability involves implementing programs that relieve family caregivers physically, and foster family networking around the person being cared for. Special attention should also be paid to the socially disadvantaged in order to fight inequalities in health capability.

Indexed as

Health StatusBayes TheoremCaregiversFemaleHumansLife StyleLuxembourgMaleMiddle AgedPersonal SatisfactionSelf EfficacySex DistributionSocial SupportSocioeconomic FactorsStroke RehabilitationSurveys and QuestionnairesBayesian approachFatigueFeeling abandonedHealth capability of family caregiversHealth inequalitiesMaterial conditionsStroke

Identifiers

PMID27125282
PMCPMC4848818

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.