ArticleBMC geriatrics2024
Validating interRAI Chinese self-reported carer needs (SCaN) assessment and predicting caregiving distress among informal Chinese caregivers of older adults.
Article in BMC geriatrics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Heterogeneous trajectories of family resilience and their predictors among family caregivers of older adults receiving maintenance hemodialysis: a longitudinal study.BMC nephrology · 2026Article
- Article
- Elements of burden among informal caregivers of community-dwelling older adults receiving home care nursing: a cross-sectional study on health status, well-being, and gender differences.BMC geriatrics · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThis study aims to (1) determine the reliability and validity of the interRAI Chinese Self-reported Carer Needs (SCaN) assessment among informal Chinese caregivers of older adults, (2) identify predictors of caregiving distress in Asian regions with long-standing Confucian values of filial piety and family responsibility.
methodsThis cross-sectional study recruited 531 informal Chinese caregivers of older adults in Hong Kong, Shanghai, Taiwan, and Singapore. The scale reliability was examined using Cronbach's alphas (α) and McDonald's omega coefficient (ω). The concurrent validity and discriminant validity were assessed using Spearman rank correlations (rho). To examine the predictors of caregiving distress among informal caregivers of older adults, we employed hierarchical linear regression analyses informed by the Model of Carer Stress and Burden and categorized the predictors into six domains.
resultsResults revealed good internal consistency reliability (α = 0.83-0.96) and concurrent validity (rho = 0.45-0.74) of the interRAI Chinese SCaN assessment. Hierarchical linear regression analysis revealed that entering the background factors, primary stressors, secondary stressors, appraisal, and exacerbating factors all significantly enhanced the model's predictability, indicating that the source of caregiving distress is multidimensional. In the full model, caregivers with longer informal care time, lack of support from family and friends, have unmet needs, experience role overload, have sleep problems, and low IADL functioning are at a higher risk of caregiving distress.
conclusionsThe interRAI Chinese SCaN Assessment was found to be a reliable and valid tool among the Chinese informal caregivers of older adults. It would be useful for determining family caregivers' strengths, needs, and challenges, and tailoring interventions that address the potentially modifiable factors associated with caregiving distress and maximize support. Healthcare providers working in home and community settings should be aware of the early identification of caregiving distress and routine assessment of their needs and empower them to continue taking care of their needs and providing adequate care to the care recipient.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.