Cited by 143Palliative Care and End-of-Life IssuesNursing care and researchPalliative and Oncologic Care

Gender differences in caregiver burden and its determinants in family members of terminally ill cancer patients

Schrank, Beate, Ebert‐Vogel, Alexandra, Amering, Michaela, Masel, Eva K., Neubauer, Marie, Watzke, Herbert, Zehetmayer, Sonja, Schur, Sophie·2016·Psycho-Oncology

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Female family caregivers consistently report higher levels of stress and burden compared to male caregivers. Explanations for the apparently higher psychological vulnerability of female caregivers are largely missing to date. This study assesses the correlates and determinants of caregiver burden in family caregivers of advanced cancer patients with a specific focus on gender differences. METHODS: Three hundred and eight self-identified main informal caregivers of advanced cancer patients were cross-sectionally assessed using structured questionnaires for caregiver burden and hypothesised determinants of burden, including sociodemographic characteristics, caring arrangements, support needs, hope and coping style. Gender differences and predictors of burden were assessed using t-tests, chi-squared tests and univariate linear regression. Significant univariate predictors were entered in an analysis of covariance separately for men and women. RESULTS: Burden was significantly higher in women. Hope was the most significant protective factor against burden in both genders, together with perceived fulfilment of support needs. Only in women emotion-oriented coping and being in employment while caring were significantly predictive of higher burden in the multivariate analysis. The model explained 36% of the variance in burden in men and 29% in women. CONCLUSION: Psychological support interventions for family caregivers should take gender-specific risk factors into account. Interventions focusing on keeping up hope while caring for a terminally ill family member may be a valuable addition to palliative services to improve support for family carers. Women may benefit from interventions that address adaptive coping and strategies to deal with the dual demands of employment and caring. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/pon.4005

Cites

42 of 42 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Schrank, B., Ebert‐Vogel, A., Amering, M., Masel, E. K., Neubauer, M., Watzke, H., Zehetmayer, S., & Schur, S.
Affiliations
Medical University of Vienna (AT)
Corresponding author
Schur, Sophie
Venue
Psycho-Oncology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2015-10-18
Volume
25
Issue
7
Pages
808-814
ISSN
  • 1057-9249 (ISSN-L)
  • 1099-1611
OpenAlex
W1941372448
Cited by
143
References
42
Citations by year
2026: 10 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 20 · 2023: 14 · 2022: 14 · 2021: 15 · 2020: 24 · 2019: 14 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 9 · 2016: 5
FWCI
7.85
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Psycho-Oncology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Palliative Care and End-of-Life Issues
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Pharmacy › Nursing care and research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Palliative and Oncologic Care
Keywords
caregiver burden, gender differences, family caregivers, terminal cancer patients, advanced cancer, hope, coping styles, emotion-focused coping, support needs, psychological support interventions, palliative care, informal care
MeSH terms
Adaptation, Psychological, Adult, Aged, Family, Family Health, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Neoplasms, Surveys and Questionnaires, Sex Factors, Caregivers, Terminally Ill

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review