Cited by 214Dementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchNursing care and researchFamily Caregiving in Mental Illness

Measurement and correlates of family caregiver self-efficacy for managing dementia

Fortinsky, R. H., Kercher, K., Burant, C. J.·2002·Aging & Mental Health

Abstract

Researchers in the aging field are paying increasing attention to the importance of perceived self-efficacy in understanding experiences and health-related outcomes of family caregivers. This paper details the strategy we used to measure family caregiver self-efficacy for managing dementia, and reports on observed associations between the resulting self-efficacy measures, caregiver depressive symptoms, and caregiver physical health symptoms. Family caregivers (n = 197) were interviewed after calling a local Alzheimer's Association chapter in the mid-western USA. Nine items inquiring about caregivers' certainty that they could carry out specific behaviors related to dementia care clustered into two distinct self-efficacy factors: symptom management self-efficacy (4 items) and community support service use self-efficacy (5 items). Internal consistency reliability for both factors was high (Cronbach's alpha = 0.77 and 0.78, respectively). Symptom management self-efficacy demonstrated a much stronger correlation with a published global caregiver competence measure than did service use self-efficacy (r = 0.49 and 0.27, respectively). In a multivariate regression model predicting caregiver depression symptoms, higher symptom management self-efficacy scores were associated with fewer depressive symptoms (beta = -0.17, p < 0.05). In a separate model, higher service use self-efficacy scores (beta = -0.20, p < 0.01) and higher symptom management self-efficacy scores (beta = -0.16, p < 0.05) were associated with fewer physical health symptoms. These new measures of dementia management self-efficacy hold promise for use in future studies.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/13607860220126763

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
Fortinsky, R. H., Kercher, K., & Burant, C. J.
Affiliations
  • UConn Health (US)
  • Case Western Reserve University (US)
Venue
Aging & Mental Health
Published
2002-05
Volume
6
Issue
2
Pages
153-160
ISSN
  • 1360-7863 (ISSN-L)
  • 1364-6915
OpenAlex
W2049155331
Cited by
214
References
23
Citations by year
2026: 9 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 13 · 2022: 13 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 14 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 17 · 2017: 9 · 2016: 9 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 8 · 2013: 7 · 2012: 14
FWCI
2.52
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Aging & Mental Health (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Dementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Pharmacy › Nursing care and research
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Family Caregiving in Mental Illness
Keywords
family caregivers, self-efficacy, dementia care, caregiver depression, caregiver physical health, caregiver competence, scale development, Alzheimer's disease
MeSH terms
Aged, Aging, Dementia, Depression, Female, Health Status, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Psychometrics, Quality of Life, Regression Analysis, Social Support, Caregivers, Self Efficacy

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