ArticlePCN reports : psychiatry and clinical neurosciences2025
Young carer knowledge scale: Development, validation, and implications for support.
Article in PCN reports : psychiatry and clinical neurosciences, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Young carer knowledge scale: Development, validation, and implications for support.PCN reports : psychiatry and clinical neurosciences · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Aim: "Young carers (YCs)" are children under the age of 18 who undertake adult caregiving roles, including household chores, family care, nursing, and emotional support. Despite the growing attention to YCs in Japan, public understanding remains limited. This study aims to develop a scale to measure YCs' knowledge and examine its reliability and validity. Methods: A web-based survey was conducted in October 2023 with 300 participants aged 22-70 years. Participants were divided into three groups based on their subjective awareness of YCs: unaware, aware but unfamiliar, and aware and familiar. After excluding dishonest responses, data from 218 individuals (mean age = 53.2 ± 10.5 years) were analyzed. A 57-item questionnaire was developed, and exploratory factor analysis (principal factor method, Promax rotation) was conducted. Reliability was assessed using Cronbach's Results: Factor analysis identified 29 items across three factors: excessive family roles, care-related daily life challenges, and hidden impacts of caring. The scale showed high internal consistency ( Conclusion: These findings suggest that this scale may help assess the public understanding of YCs. Future studies should investigate variations in YCs' knowledge across different occupations, beliefs, and cultural 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.