The DOI matches its Crossref record; 34 of the 34 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Negative Impact and Positive Value in Caregiving: Validation of the COPE Index in a Six-Country Sample of Carers
Abstract
PURPOSE: The present study attempts to further validate the COPE Index on a large sample of carers drawn from six European countries. DESIGN AND METHODS: We used a cross-sectional survey, with approximately 1,000 carers recruited in each of six countries by means of a common standard evaluation protocol. Our saturation recruitment of a designated quota of carers occurred by means of several channels, in identified geographical zones within countries. Interviews were carried out with primary informal carers by use of a common assessment tool. We subjected items of the COPE Index to principal component analysis and we assessed emergent components through the use of Cronbach's alpha reliability procedures. We examined factor components as summative scales for confirmatory correlations with caregiving and psychological variables. RESULTS: Three components emerged, which we identified as the negative impact of caregiving, the positive value of caregiving, and the quality of support for caregiving. Internal consistency was good for negative impact and satisfactory for positive value and quality of support. Negative value was most consistently and strongly correlated with caregiving and psychological variables, although we did find diverse associations between these variables and the COPE Index subscales. IMPLICATIONS: The COPE Index is a brief, first-stage assessment of some sophistication that can enable health and social care professionals to develop appropriately targeted interventions to enhance the positive aspects of the caregiving experience and quality of support, as well as reduce the negative impacts of caregiving.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
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 cited source doesn’t support the claim as written.
In the citing paper
“Cronbach α for COPE Index is .87 [27].”
From CareACT - internet-based intervention for enhancing the psychological well-being of elderly caregivers - a study protocol of a controlled trial (2019) · cites this paper as [27]
Checked by a reasoning model — may be wrong.
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
The Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale
Zigmond, A. S., & Snaith, R. P. (1983) · Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica · doi:10.1111/j.1600-0447.1983.tb09716.x · Cited by 47,139
Functional evaluation : Barthel index
Mahonery, F. I. (1965) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 12,762
What is coefficient alpha? An examination of theory and applications
Cortina, J. M. (1993) · Journal of Applied Psychology · doi:10.1037/0021-9010.78.1.98 · Cited by 8,810 · cited 1×
“It should also be noted that the computation of the alpha value is related to the number of items a scale contains, with a high number of items inflating this value (Cortina, 1993).”
Background(1988) · NFER-Nelson eBooks · Cited by 5,560
Validating the SF-36 health survey questionnaire: new outcome measure for primary care.
Brazier, J. E., Harper, R., Jones, N. M., O’Cathain, A., Thomas, K. J., Usherwood, T. P., & Westlake, L. (1992) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.305.6846.160 · Cited by 4,660
The Whoqol Group (1998) · Social Science & Medicine · doi:10.1016/s0277-9536(98)00009-4 · Cited by 3,802
Caregiving as a Risk Factor for Mortality: The Caregiver Health Effects Study
Schulz, R., & Beach, S. R. (1999) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.282.23.2215 · Cited by 3,340 · cited 1×
“Unfortunately, caregiving can have a significant negative impact on the psychological well-being and health of the carer (Barinaga, 1998; Schulz & Beach, 1999).”
BackgroundField Methods in Cross-Cultural Research
Shelly, R. K., Lonner, W. J., & Berry, J. W. (1988) · Contemporary Sociology A Journal of Reviews · doi:10.2307/2069488 · Cited by 2,113
The handbook of psychological testing, 2nd ed.
Kline, P. (1993) · Cited by 1,248
How Effective Are Interventions With Caregivers? An Updated Meta-Analysis
Sörensen, S., Pinquart, M., & Duberstein, P. R. (2002) · The Gerontologist · doi:10.1093/geront/42.3.356 · Cited by 1,146
Research works printed but not linked: 5
- 1986, The British journal of medical psychology, 56, 165
- Attar, 1965, Maryland state medical journal, 14, 61
- 2001, Gerontology, 47, 159
- 2006, The New Zealand medical journal, 119, 2053
- 2003, The Journals of Gerontology Series B: Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences, 58B, S127
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Exploring the care needs of patients with advanced COPD: An overview of the literature
Gardiner, C., Gott, M., Payne, S. A., Small, N., Barnes, S., Halpin, D. M. G., Ruse, C. E., & Seamark, D. (2009) · Respiratory Medicine · doi:10.1016/j.rmed.2009.09.007 · Cited by 162
Bidwell, J. T., Vellone, E., Lyons, K. S., D’Agostino, F., Riegel, B. J., Juárez‐Vela, R., Hiatt, S. O., Alvaro, R., & Lee, C. S. (2015) · Research in Nursing & Health · doi:10.1002/nur.21675 · Cited by 147
Groenou, M. I. B. V., de Boer, A., & Iedema, J. (2013) · European Journal of Ageing · doi:10.1007/s10433-013-0276-6 · Cited by 132
Measuring the impact of informal elderly caregiving: a systematic review of tools
Mosquera, I., Vergara, I., Larrañaga, I., Machón, M., del Río, M., & Calderón, C. (2015) · Quality of Life Research · doi:10.1007/s11136-015-1159-4 · Cited by 106
Quinn, C., Nelis, S. M., Martyr, A., Victor, C. R., Morris, R. G., & Clare, L. (2019) · American Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry · doi:10.1016/j.jagp.2019.02.005 · Cited by 101
Metadata
- Authors
- Balducci, C., Mnich, E., McKee, K. J., Lamura, G., Beckmann, A., Krevers, B., Wojszel, Z. B., Nolan, M., Prouskas, C., Bien, B., & Oberg, B.
- Affiliations
- University of Trento (IT)
- Universität Hamburg (DE)
- University of Sheffield (GB)
- Istituto Nazionale di Riposo e Cura per Anziani (IT)
- Linköping University (SE)
- Medical University of Białystok (PL)
- National School of Public Health (GR)
- Corresponding author
- Balducci, C.
- Venue
- The Gerontologist
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2008-06-01
- Volume
- 48
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 276-286
- ISSN
- 0016-9013 (ISSN-L)
- 1758-5341
- OpenAlex
- W2104136464
- Cited by
- 140
- References
- 32
- Citations by year
- 2026: 6 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 12 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 15 · 2018: 12 · 2017: 9 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 9 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 10 · 2012: 8
- FWCI
- 16.54
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- The Gerontologist (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Nursing › Research and Theory › Nursing care and research
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Intergenerational Family Dynamics and Caregiving
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Family Caregiving in Mental Illness
- Keywords
- informal caregivers, caregiver burden, psychometric validation, factor structure, cross-cultural validation, caregiver psychological well-being
- MeSH terms
- Affect, Aged, Cross-Sectional Studies, Depression, Female, Humans, Male, Quality of Health Care, Quality of Life, Surveys and Questionnaires, Role, Severity of Illness Index, 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
