CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 443Nursing care and researchIntergenerational Family Dynamics and CaregivingAging, Elder Care, and Social Issues

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 86 of the 86 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Caregiver burden—A critical discussion

Bastawrous, Marina·2013·International Journal of Nursing Studies
DOI 10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2012.10.005
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Currently, 15%, 12.8% and 17.1% of the Canadian, American and European populations, respectively, are 65 years or older. Due to aging-related disabilities, elderly individuals will require support from family members while in the community. Annually, family caregivers save the Canadian and American healthcare systems $25 billion and $350 billion, respectively. However, to maintain the important role they play, caregivers' experiences must be investigated in order to provide appropriate support. Despite the fact that 'caregiver burden' is preponderantly used as an indicator of the caregiving experience, much disagreement remains on what the term entails and how it should be utilized. This paper endeavors to critically discuss the concept of 'caregiver burden', its use in the literature and the implications this has for future research and clinical practice. The vagueness derived from the various 'caregiver burden' definitions limits the term's relevance to policy-making and clinical practice. Additionally, much of the literature on 'caregiver burden' is not theoretically framed, which reduces the conceptual clarity of the term. Quantitative measures are largely used to investigate 'caregiver burden', which can sometimes fail to capture contextual features that are relevant to caregiving outcomes (e.g., culture). Stress theory and role theory are recommended as guiding frameworks for future research that investigates 'caregiver burden'. Future research on 'caregiver burden' would also benefit from integrating qualitative and quantitative approaches into mixed method designs in order to gain a holistic understanding of the concept.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2012.10.005

Cites

86 of 86 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Verification

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?

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Show all 82 references

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 401–443 of 443

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Bastawrous, M.
Venue
International Journal of Nursing Studies
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2013-03
Volume
50
Issue
3
Pages
431-441
ISSN
0020-7489 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2012.10.005
OpenAlex
W2146405208
Cited by
440
References
82
Citations by year
2026: 25 · 2025: 34 · 2024: 38 · 2023: 59 · 2022: 35 · 2021: 55 · 2020: 47 · 2019: 32 · 2018: 29 · 2017: 26 · 2016: 25 · 2015: 18 · 2014: 15 · 2013: 2
FWCI
26.15
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
Locations
  • International Journal of Nursing Studies (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Nursing › Research and Theory › Nursing care and research
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Intergenerational Family Dynamics and Caregiving
  • Social Sciences › Life-span and Life-course Studies › Aging, Elder Care, and Social Issues
Keywords
caregiver burden, family caregivers, elderly care, population aging, caregiver experiences, conceptual clarity, stress theory, role theory, caregiver support, mixed methods
MeSH terms
Aged, Canada, Europe, Humans, Stress, Psychological, United States, Caregivers, Cost Savings

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