Cited by 453Family Caregiving in Mental IllnessFamily Support in IllnessNursing care and research

Caring for relatives with serious mental illness: the development of the Experience of Caregiving Inventory

Szmukler, G. I., Burgess, P., Herrman, H., Bloch, S., Benson, A., Colusa, S.·1996·Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology

Abstract

The aim of this study was to develop a practical, comprehensive, and valid self-report measure of the experience of caring for a relative with a serious mental illness. The notion of caregiver "burden' was rejected; instead caregiving was conceptualised within a 'stress-appraisal-coping' framework. A 66-item version of the Experience of Caregiving Inventory (ECI) was derived from analyses of responses from 626 caregivers, and then tested on an independent sample of 63 relatives of patients with schizophrenia recently in acute care. The extent to which the ECI complied with the stress-coping model was tested, especially the degree to which it, in association with coping, predicted psychological morbidity in carers. Ten sub-scales with good internal consistency resulted from our analyses, eight negative (difficult behaviours; negative symptoms; stigma; problems with services; effects on the family; the need to provide backup; dependency; loss) and two positive (rewarding personal experiences; good aspects of the relationship with the patient). The ECI, in conjunction with coping style, predicted a large proportion of the variance in the General Health Questionnaire (GHQ). We concluded that the ECI taps salient dimensions of caregiving distinct from, although linked with, coping and psychological morbidity. It has potential as a useful outcome measure for interventions aimed at promoting caregiver well-being.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/bf00785760

Cites

26 of 26 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
Szmukler, G. I., Burgess, P., Herrman, H., Bloch, S., Benson, A., & Colusa, S.
Affiliations
  • Bethlem Royal Hospital (GB)
  • The University of Melbourne (AU)
Venue
Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology
Published
1996
Volume
31
Issue
3-4
Pages
137-148
ISSN
  • 0933-7954 (ISSN-L)
  • 1433-9285
OpenAlex
W2019547221
Cited by
453
References
26
Citations by year
2026: 13 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 15 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 13 · 2021: 12 · 2020: 20 · 2019: 14 · 2018: 23 · 2017: 21 · 2016: 24 · 2015: 24 · 2014: 26 · 2013: 29 · 2012: 21
FWCI
6.31
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Family Caregiving in Mental Illness
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Family Support in Illness
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Pharmacy › Nursing care and research
Keywords
caregiver experiences, schizophrenia, coping styles, caregiver burden, stigma, family caregiving, caregiver well-being, outcome measure development
MeSH terms
Adaptation, Psychological, Adult, Aged, Mental Disorders, Family Health, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Surveys and Questionnaires, Sex Factors, Stress, Psychological, Caregivers

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