Cited by 136Elder Abuse and NeglectDementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchIntimate Partner and Family Violence

The determinants of family carers’ abusive behaviour to people with dementia: results of the CARD study

Cooper, C., Selwood, A., Blanchard, M., Walker, Z., Blizard, R., Livingston, G.·2010·Journal of Affective Disorders

Abstract

Background Although dementia and elder abuse prevention are political priorities, there are no evidence-based interventions to reduce abuse by family carers. We have limited understanding of why some family carers, but not others in similar circumstances, behave abusively. We aimed to test our hypothesis, that more anxious dementia carers report more abusive behaviours, and dysfunctional coping strategies and carer burden mediate this relationship.Method We interviewed 220 family/friend dementia carers from Essex and London Community Mental Health Teams. We used the revised Modified Conflict Tactics Scale to measure abuse.Results More anxious and depressed carers reported more abuse; this relationship was mediated by using dysfunctional coping strategies and higher burden. Abuse was predicted by: spending more hours caring, experiencing more abusive behaviour from care recipients and higher burden.Limitations This was a cross-sectional study so we cannot confirm directions of causality. While many carers were willing to report abusive actions, some may not have been and our numbers may be an underestimate.Conclusion Anxious and depressed carers are particularly likely to report abusive behaviour when asked. Testing interventions directed at reducing carer anxiety, depression or changing unhelpful coping strategies, and/or reducing care recipient aggression where possible, is a logical and urgent next step.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jad.2009.05.001

Cites

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?

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 37 · Cited by 136

Authors
Cooper, C., Selwood, A., Blanchard, M., Walker, Z., Blizard, R., & Livingston, G.
Affiliations
University College London (GB)
Corresponding author
Cooper, C.
Venue
Journal of Affective Disorders
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2010-02
Volume
121
Issue
1-2
Pages
136-142
ISSN
0165-0327 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2125706409
Cited by
136
References
37
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 19 · 2017: 14 · 2016: 9 · 2015: 10 · 2014: 15 · 2013: 9 · 2012: 2
FWCI
13.41
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Affective Disorders (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Demography › Elder Abuse and Neglect
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Dementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
  • Social Sciences › Health › Intimate Partner and Family Violence
Keywords
dementia, elder abuse, family caregivers, abusive behavior, dysfunctional coping strategies, caregiver burden, mediation
MeSH terms
Adaptation, Psychological, Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Anxiety Disorders, Cross-Sectional Studies, Dementia, Elder Abuse, Female, United Kingdom, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Personality Inventory, Psychometrics, Risk Factors, Caregivers, Cost of Illness

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