Cited by 112Intergenerational Family Dynamics and CaregivingAging, Elder Care, and Social IssuesNursing care and research

Determining the Pattern of Community Care: Is Coresidence More Important Than Caregiver Relationship?

Tennstedt, S. L., Crawford, S., McKinlay, J. B.·1993·Journal of Gerontology

Abstract

Researchers have previously emphasized the importance of kinship tie to explaining the pattern of care received by a disabled elder. For example, it has been argued that spouses are a distinct group of caregivers, i.e., they provide more care with less help from others and experience more stress. However, based on the theory of primary group structures and functions, this study hypothesized that coresidence rather than the kinship tie is more important in determining the pattern of caregiving. When spouses are compared to other coresiding caregivers, patterns of informal care and use of formal services are similar. Variance in amounts of informal care is explained by elder gender and frailty level rather than by caregiver relationship. Similarly, level of frailty was the only important predictor of use of formal services.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/geronj/48.2.s74

Cites

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, 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?

  • Caregivers who live with their care recipient tend to provide more care.

    “as caregivers who live with their care recipient tend to provide more care.30”

    From Societal Costs of Dementia: 204 Countries, 2000–2019 (2024) · cites this paper as [30]

Cites

Still being checked.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Tennstedt, S. L., Crawford, S., & McKinlay, J. B.
Affiliations
New England Research Institutes (US)
Venue
Journal of Gerontology
Published
1993-03-01
Volume
48
Issue
2
Pages
S74-S83
ISSN
0022-1422 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2026826830
Cited by
112
References
0
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 3 · 2012: 2
FWCI
22.10
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Gerontology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • The Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) Network (American Medical Association) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health (5r37ag007182-10)
  • National Institute on Aging (AG07182)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Intergenerational Family Dynamics and Caregiving
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Aging, Elder Care, and Social Issues
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Pharmacy › Nursing care and research
Keywords
informal care, co-residence, caregiver relationships, kinship ties, older adults with disabilities, frailty, formal care services, community-based care
MeSH terms
Activities of Daily Living, Adult, Age Factors, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Community Health Services, Family, Female, Follow-Up Studies, Forecasting, Health Services for the Aged, Housing, Humans, Longitudinal Studies, Male, Middle Aged, Self Care, Sex Factors, Social Environment, Social Support, Frail Elderly, Caregivers, Marital Status

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