ArticleHealth and quality of life outcomes2025
Psychometric validation and cultural adaptation of the Chinese version of the CarerQol-7D instrument.
Article in Health and quality of life outcomes, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- The validation of the CarerQol instrument and factors associated with quality of life among informal caregivers of disabled older adults in China.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2026Article
- Empowering community volunteers improves the well-being of family caregivers of musculoskeletal disorder patients: a randomized controlled trial.BMC nursing · 2026Article
- Psychometric properties and cross-cultural adaptation of the Chinese version of the family caregiver communication tool-chronic illness.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Article
- Psychometric Validation of the Cantonese Version of the Patient-Centered Primary Care Instrument for Multimorbid Patients in Hong Kong.Journal of primary care & community healthArticle
- Psychological Distress, Caregiver Burden and Quality of Life Among Informal Carers of First Nations Australians Diagnosed With Cancer: A Cross-Sectional Study.Cancer control : journal of the Moffitt Cancer CenterArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveThis study aims to translate and validate the CarerQol in a sample of informal caregivers in China.
methodThe CarerQol was translated following a standard process. Validation data was collected from multiple sources, including hospitals, patient associations, and community health centers between September 2023 and December 2024 in China. Caregivers of individuals with disability or long-term care needs were recruited. The psychometric properties of the CarerQol-7D were evaluated through ceiling and floor effects, factorial structure, convergent and divergent validity, known-groups validity, and test-retest reliability.
resultsA total of 324 participants completed the survey and provided validated responses. The mean CarerQol level sum score was 12.8 (SD = 2.9). The CarerQol-7D showed no ceiling or floor effects at either dimension or scale levels. Test-retest reliability of the CarerQol-7D was satisfactory, as supported by ICC and Gwet's AC1 measures. Correlation analysis confirmed all hypothesized pairs of dimensions and level sum scores/utility scores between CarerQol-7D, SF-6Dv2, and ICECAP-A. The CarerQol-7D successfully distinguished between risk groups through ANOVA testing. Confirmatory factor analysis revealed that a one-factor model of the CarerQol-7D fit the data.
conclusionThis study provides the Chinese version of the CarerQol and confirms its sound psychometric properties for informal caregivers in China. These findings demonstrate the CarerQol's value in cost-effectiveness analyses of caregiving interventions and strategies.
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.