ArticleBMC psychology2024
Predictors of the quality of the relationship between informal caregiver and care recipient in informal caregiving of older people: presentation and evaluation of a new item.
Article in BMC psychology, 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.
- Development of and satisfaction with a short-term outpatient preventive medical service for working informal caregivers: a study protocol of a non-randomized prospective pilot study.Pilot and feasibility studies · 2026Article
- [When non-kin caregivers provide home care: additional burden or personal benefit for friends, neighbours, and acquaintances? - Findings from an exploratory cross-sectional study].Gesundheitswesen (Bundesverband der Arzte des Offentlichen Gesundheitsdienstes (Germany)) · 2026Article
- [Adult Day Care Service: Who Uses it and Who Wants to Use it? Multivariable Analysis of Current and Future Use of Adult Day Care Service by Elderly Persons in Long-Term Care].Gesundheitswesen (Bundesverband der Arzte des Offentlichen Gesundheitsdienstes (Germany)) · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAn important factor that has not been directly addressed very often in caregiver (CG) counseling to date is the quality of the relationship between the CG and the care recipient (CR). One reason is the lack of availability of a suitable assessment tool that is not strongly influenced by social desirability. Here, we present and evaluate a new item for the assessment of relationship quality (RQ) in the context of informal caregiving of older people.
methodsN = 962 informal caregivers of older people participated. Our item assessed RQ by providing three answer categories (positive, neutral, and negative) that were presented through the use of smiley faces. For evaluation, and to avoid bias due to social desirability, the neutral and negative categories were combined. We calculated a stepwise binary logistic regression.
resultsExpected associations with the variables care burden, perceived positive aspects, and care motivation were found (all p values < 0.01). An exploratory analysis revealed that additional predictors of RQ consisted of the CR's age as well as whether the CR's diagnosis was dementia, CG's amount of dysfunctional coping, and whether the CG was caring for more than one CR.
conclusionsWe conclude that our item is well-suited for the assessment of RQ in the context of informal caregiving of older people. Because it uses language-free answer categories by means of smiley faces, our item can be applied easily. Bias due to social desirability can be minimized by dichotomization (i.e., combining the negative and neural answer categories). In future research, our tool should be evaluated in other contexts.
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.