Cited by 29Cancer survivorship and careNursing care and researchFamily Caregiving in Mental Illness

Assessing the quality of life among caregivers of patients with gliomas

Open access
Minaya Flores, Patricia, Berbis, Julie, Chinot,, Olivier, Auquier, Pascal·2014·Neuro-Oncology Practice

Abstract

Background: The aim of the study was to analyze the impact of gliomas in caregivers' quality of life (QoL) and to compare this specific population to other oncology caregivers and the normative population in order to find differences and understand which aspects of QoL are more impacted. Methods: The sample was composed of caregivers of patients with gliomas from the Neuro-Oncology Department of Timone University Hospital of Marseilles, France. Control caregivers were selected from different oncology departments and were matched with caregivers of patients with brain cancer on age, sex, and relationship with the patients. We used the specific CareGiver Oncology Quality of Life questionnaire (CarGOQoL) to assess the impact of cancer and its treatment on caregivers' QoL. Caregivers also completed the Short Form 36 (SF36) for comparison with the French normative sample. Results: The study sample included 50 caregivers of patients with gliomas, aged 30–77 years, 28% of whom were men. When comparing specific CarGOQoL scores with those of the control caregivers, brain cancer caregivers had significantly lower scores for the burden and leisure time dimensions, with an effect size of 0.4. No significant differences between cases and controls were observed with SF36. Conclusion: Caregivers of patients with gliomas showed increased burden scores and lower scores for the leisure time dimension. This could be explained by their unique care situation, in which patients become more limited physically and cognitively.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/nop/npu027

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?

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Minaya Flores, P., Berbis, J., Chinot, & Auquier, P.
Affiliations
  • School of Medicine, Aix-Marseilles University, Marseilles, France (P.M.F., J.B., P.A.); EA3279, Self-perceived Health Assessment Research Unit, Marseilles, France (P.M.F., J.B., P.A.); Timone University Hospital, Department of Neurooncology, Marseilles, France (O.C.)
  • Aix-Marseille Université (FR)
Venue
Neuro-Oncology Practice
Published
2014-10-16
Volume
1
Issue
4
Pages
191-197
ISSN
  • 2054-2577 (ISSN-L)
  • 2054-2585
OpenAlex
W2022016679
Cited by
29
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 1
FWCI
1.13
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Neuro-Oncology Practice (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • HighWire Press Open Archive (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Cancer survivorship and care
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Pharmacy › Nursing care and research
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Family Caregiving in Mental Illness
Keywords
caregiver quality of life, glioma, family caregivers, caregiver burden, leisure, brain cancer, SF-36, reference values, neuro-oncology

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