Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30887387›Full record

ArticleQuality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation2019

Development and validation of the caregiver roles and responsibilities scale in cancer caregivers.

Valerie Shilling, Rachel Starkings, Valerie Jenkins, David Cella, Lesley Fallowfield

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 3 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, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Guideline
  2. Guideline
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Psychometric validation of the Danish cancer caregiver roles and responsibilities scale.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2026
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Association between emotional competence and risk of unmet supportive care needs in caregivers of cancer patients at the beginning of care.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2024
    Article
  9. Article
  10. 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.

Valerie ShillingSussex Health Outcomes Research and Education in Cancer (SHORE-C), Brighton and Sussex Medical School, University of Sussex, Brighton, UK. v.m.shilling@sussex.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5610-0321
Rachel StarkingsSussex Health Outcomes Research and Education in Cancer (SHORE-C), Brighton and Sussex Medical School, University of Sussex, Brighton, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1947-018X
Valerie JenkinsSussex Health Outcomes Research and Education in Cancer (SHORE-C), Brighton and Sussex Medical School, University of Sussex, Brighton, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8939-0081
David CellaDepartment of Medical Social Sciences, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9881-4541
Lesley FallowfieldSussex Health Outcomes Research and Education in Cancer (SHORE-C), Brighton and Sussex Medical School, University of Sussex, Brighton, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0577-4518

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe caregiver roles and responsibilities scale (CRRS) was developed to facilitate formal assessment of broad life impacts for informal (i.e. unpaid) caregivers to people with cancer. Here we report the development and initial validation.

methodsThe CRRS was developed from the thematic analysis of two interview studies with cancer patients (stage III-IV breast, gynaecological, lung or melanoma) and caregivers. In the evaluation studies, participants completed the CRRS alongside the Caregiver Quality of Life-Cancer, the main criterion measure for concurrent validity, and the WHOQOL-BREF for additional convergent validity data. Questionnaires were completed at baseline, 7-days and 2-months. Demographic data and patient characteristics were collected at baseline.

resultsTwo-hundred and forty-five caregivers to people with stage I-IV breast, colorectal, gynaecological, head and neck, lung or renal cancer or melanoma completed the CRRS at least once. The final 41 core items selected comprised five subscales: Support and Impact, Lifestyle, Emotional Health and Wellbeing, Self-care and Financial Wellbeing as well as three standalone items. Missing data rate was low (0.6%); there were no ceiling or floor effects for total scores. Cronbach's alpha was 0.92 for the CRRS-41; 0.75-0.87 for the subscales. CRRS showed good test-retest reliability (ICC = 0.91), sensitivity to change and the predicted pattern of correlation with validation measures r = 0.75-0.89. The standalone 7-item jobs and careers subscale requires further validation.

conclusionsInitial evaluation shows the CRRS has good validity and reliability and is a promising tool for the assessment of the effects of cancer and cancer treatment on the lives and wellbeing of informal caregivers.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overCaregiversFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedOutcome Assessment, Health CarePsychometricsQuality of LifeReproducibility of ResultsSurveys and QuestionnairesYoung AdultCancerCaregivingOutcome measuresPsychometric performanceQuestionnaire developmentValidation

Identifiers

PMID30887387
PMCPMC6522459

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.