Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28372581›Full record

ArticleAlzheimer's research & therapy2017

Perseverance time of informal caregivers for people with dementia: construct validity, responsiveness and predictive validity.

Anke Richters, René J F Melis, N Job van Exel, Marcel G M Olde Rikkert, Marjolein A van der Marck

Abstract readValidation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Alzheimer's research & therapy, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
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.

Anke RichtersDepartment of Geriatric Medicine, Donders Institute for Brain Cognition and Behaviour, Radboud university medical center, PO Box 9101 (hp 925), Nijmegen, 6500 HB, The Netherlands.
René J F MelisRadboudumc Alzheimer Center, Radboud university medical center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
N Job van ExelInstitute of Health Policy and Management, Erasmus University Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Marcel G M Olde RikkertDepartment of Geriatric Medicine, Donders Institute for Brain Cognition and Behaviour, Radboud university medical center, PO Box 9101 (hp 925), Nijmegen, 6500 HB, The Netherlands.
Marjolein A van der MarckRadboudumc Alzheimer Center, Radboud university medical center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands. marjolein.vandermarck@radboudumc.nl.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundInformal care is essential for many people with dementia (PwD), but it often results in a considerable burden for the caregiver. The perseverance time instrument integrates the aspect of perceived burden with the caregiver's capacity to cope with the burden, in contrast to most available instruments, which measure solely the burden of caregiving. The aim of this study was to extend insight into psychometric properties of the perseverance time instrument, specifically the construct validity, responsiveness, and predictive validity, within the population of informal caregivers for PwD.

methodsData from two studies among informal caregivers of community-dwelling PwD in the Netherlands were used. The first study included 198 caregivers from a single region in the Netherlands and lasted 1 year. The second was a cross-sectional nationwide study with 166 caregivers for PwD. Questionnaires of both studies included questions regarding demographics and informal care, perseverance time, and other informal caregiver outcomes (Caregiver Strain Index, Self-rated Burden scale, Care-related Quality of Life instrument, and visual analogue scale health scores). Construct validity and responsiveness were assessed using a hypothesis-testing approach. The predictive validity of demographic characteristics and perseverance time for living situation after 1 year (living at home, institutionalized, or deceased) was assessed with multivariable multinomial regression.

resultsAll but one of the hypotheses regarding construct validity were met. Three of five hypotheses regarding responsiveness were met. Perseverance time scores at baseline were associated with living situation after 1 year (p < 0.01), unlike age, sex, and relationship with PwD. Perseverance time strongly increased predictive power for living situation after 1 year (c-index between 0.671 and 0.775) in addition to demographic characteristics.

conclusionsThis study supports previous findings regarding the construct validity of the perseverance time instrument and adds new evidence of good construct validity, responsiveness, and predictive validity. The predictive power of perseverance time scores for living situation exceeds the predictive power of other burden measures and indicates informal care as an important factor for maintaining the patient at home.

Indexed as

Adaptation, PsychologicalCost of IllnessSurveys and QuestionnairesAgedAged, 80 and overCaregiversCross-Sectional StudiesDementiaFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedMultivariate AnalysisNetherlandsPsychometricsQuality of LifeBurdenDementiaInformal carePsychometric propertiesValidity

Identifiers

PMID28372581
PMCPMC5379582

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.