Cited by 71Stroke Rehabilitation and RecoveryNursing care and researchCancer survivorship and care

Associations among disability, depression, anxiety, stress, and quality of life between stroke survivors and their family caregivers: An Actor‐Partner Interdependence Model

Yuliana, Sri, Yu, Erica, Rias, Yohanes Andy, Atikah, Nur, Chang, Hsiu Ju, Tsai, Hsiu Ting·2023·Journal of Advanced Nursing

Abstract

Aim To explore the effects of disability, depressive, anxiety and stress symptoms on patients' and their partners' quality of life (QoL) using the actor-partner interdependence model (APIM). Design A cross-sectional study using actor-partner interdependence model. Methods We recruited 183 dyads of stroke survivors and their family caregivers in Indonesia. The World Health Organization Disability Assessment (WHODAS 2.0), Depression, Anxiety and Stress (DASS-42) and Rand Short Form Health Survey (SF-36) were used to measure disability, depressive, anxiety and stress symptoms and QoL of stroke survivors and family caregivers. The actor-partner interdependence model was tested using multilevel modelling. The actor-partner interdependence mediation model (APIMeM) was applied to estimate the direct and indirect effect. Results Disability had actor effects on stroke survivor's overall QoL and partner effect on family caregiver's overall QoL. More severe disability of stroke survivors was associated with a lower overall QoL of their own and that of family caregiver's overall QoL. Depressive symptoms of stroke survivors had actor effects on stroke survivors' overall QoL and partner effects on family caregivers' overall QoL. Actor and partner effects also exist on family caregiver's depression symptoms to their own overall QoL and stroke survivor's overall QoL. Moreover, higher anxiety symptoms were associated with lower levels of their own and partner's overall QoL in both stroke surv…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/jan.15465

Cites

0 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
Yuliana, S., Yu, E., Rias, Y. A., Atikah, N., Chang, H. J., & Tsai, H. T.
Affiliations
  • Sekolah Tinggi Ilmu Kesehatan Yahya Bima (ID)
  • The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston (US)
  • Institut Ilmu Kesehatan Bhakti Wiyata (ID)
  • Politeknik Kesehatan Kemenkes Surakarta (ID)
  • National Yang Ming Chiao Tung University (TW)
  • Taipei Medical University (TW)
Corresponding author
Tsai, Hsiu Ting
Venue
Journal of Advanced Nursing
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2022-10-18
Volume
79
Issue
1
Pages
135-148
ISSN
  • 0309-2402 (ISSN-L)
  • 1365-2648
OpenAlex
W4306742563
Cited by
71
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 22 · 2025: 26 · 2024: 15 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 1
FWCI
5.29
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Advanced Nursing (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Ministry of Science and Technology, Taiwan (MOST109‐2314‐B‐038‐110‐, MOST110‐2314‐B‐038‐081)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Rehabilitation › Stroke Rehabilitation and Recovery
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Pharmacy › Nursing care and research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Cancer survivorship and care
Keywords
stroke, family caregivers, quality of life, disability, depression, anxiety, stress, actor-partner interdependence, dyads, mediation, caregiver burden, WHODAS 2.0, DASS-42, SF-36, Indonesia
MeSH terms
Anxiety, Cross-Sectional Studies, Depression, Humans, Quality of Life, Caregivers, Survivors, Stroke

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