Cited by 33Grief, Bereavement, and Mental HealthPalliative Care and End-of-Life IssuesPalliative and Oncologic Care

Acceptance and valued living as critical appraisal and coping strengths for caregivers dealing with terminal illness and bereavement

Davis, Esther L, Deane, Frank P., Lyons, Geoffrey C.B.·2015·Palliative and Supportive Care

Abstract

Objective: Informal caregivers of palliative care patients play an essential role in the coordination of care for patients during their final phases of life. However, undertaking a caregiving role can have enduring psychological consequences for caregivers and interfere with functioning. Studies have investigated a variety of factors associated with individual differences in caregiver psychosocial outcomes, but little is known about their relative impact, and there is a need for guiding models to support research in this area. Method: A review of the literature was conducted on factors influencing the psychological distress and grief of caregivers. Drawing from acceptance and commitment therapy (ACT) and Stroebe and colleagues' integrative risk factor framework, we developed a process model to describe individual differences in caregiver psychological distress and grief. Results: The model presents caregiver psychological distress and grief as functions of death attitudes and communication about death and dying, mediated by acceptance and valued living from an ACT perspective. An outline of the empirical and theoretical underpinnings for each component in the model is provided. Significant of results: The presented model is an inherently strengths-based model that is concordant with acceptance- and values- (ACT) based interventions to facilitate coping in caregivers.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1017/s1478951514000431

Cites

98 of 98 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

Research works printed but not linked: 7

  1. Tomer, 2012, The human quest for meaning, 209
  2. 2011, Disability care and support
  3. 2013, Australia's welfare 2013
  4. 2013, Who cares? Support for carers of people approaching the end of life
  5. Ardelt, 2008, Existential and spiritual issues in death attitudes, 139
  6. 2013, National bereavement survey (VOICES) 2012
  7. Redfoot, 2013, The aging of the baby boom and the growing care gap: A look at future declines in the availability of family caregivers

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Davis, E. L., Deane, F. P., & Lyons, G. C. B.
Affiliations
University of Wollongong (AU)
Corresponding author
Davis, Esther L
Venue
Palliative and Supportive Care
Published
2014-04-30
Volume
13
Issue
2
Pages
359-368
ISSN
  • 1478-9515 (ISSN-L)
  • 1478-9523
OpenAlex
W2133998131
Cited by
33
References
98
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 3 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 1
FWCI
0.30
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Palliative & Supportive Care (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Research Bank (Australian Catholic University) (submittedVersion)
  • Research Online (University of Wollongong) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Grief, Bereavement, and Mental Health
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Palliative Care and End-of-Life Issues
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Palliative and Oncologic Care
Keywords
informal caregivers, palliative care, terminal illness, bereavement, caregiver psychological distress, grief, acceptance and commitment therapy, attitudes toward death, strengths-based approach, coping
MeSH terms
Adaptation, Psychological, Attitude to Death, Bereavement, Grief, Humans, Models, Psychological, Palliative Care, Terminal Care, 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