The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Determining the Pattern of Community Care: Is Coresidence More Important Than Caregiver Relationship?
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.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
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?
In the citing paper
“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]
Citations
Cites
Still being checked.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Ory, M. G., Hoffman, R. R., Yee, J. L., Tennstedt, S., & Schulz, R. (1999) · The Gerontologist · doi:10.1093/geront/39.2.177 · Cited by 991
Self-citationPinquart, M., & Sörensen, S. (2011) · Psychology and Aging · doi:10.1037/a0021863 · Cited by 947
Gender Differences in Psychiatric Morbidity Among Family Caregivers
Yee, J. L., & Schulz, R. (2000) · The Gerontologist · doi:10.1093/geront/40.2.147 · Cited by 660
A review of loneliness: concept and definitions, determinants and consequences
Gierveld, J. D. J. (1998) · Reviews in Clinical Gerontology · doi:10.1017/s0959259898008090 · Cited by 632
Contributors to and Mediators of Psychological Well-Being for Informal Caregivers
Yates, M. E., Tennstedt, S., & Chang, B.-H. (1999) · The Journals of Gerontology Series B: Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences · doi:10.1093/geronb/54b.1.p12 · Cited by 364
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Tennstedt, S. L., Crawford, S., & McKinlay, J. B.
- Affiliations
- New England Research Institutes (US)
- ORCID
- Crawford, S.
- Venue
- Journal of Gerontology
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- 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
- Social Sciences › Life-span and Life-course Studies › Aging, Elder Care, and Social Issues
- Health Sciences › Nursing › Research and Theory › 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
