CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 87Aging, Elder Care, and Social IssuesAging, Health, and DisabilityIntergenerational Family Dynamics and Caregiving

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 28 of the 29 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Distribución en España del cuidado formal e informal a las personas de 65 y más años en situación de dependencia

Open access
Rogero-García, Jesús·2009·Revista Española de Salud Pública
DOI 10.1590/s1135-57272009000300005
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

BACKGROUND: There has been a relative lack of research examing the distribution of care to elderly dependent people in Spain. The aim of this paper is to analyse how formal and informal care is provided to elderly dependent people in Spain and to assess the socio-economic conditions in which the different kinds of care emerge. METHODS: This study is based on a sample of the elderly dependent population selected from those who reported the need of care in the 2003 Spanish Health Survey. The distribution of care among older people was cross-tabulated to identify the type of care, while regression models were used to identify the socio-economic characteristics of people receiving formal and/or informal care. RESULTS: Around 7.5% of the elderly people who need care do not receive it. Among those who do receive it, 89.4% receive informal care, 14.8% private care and 8.1% public care. 11.9% of elderly people in the study receive a mix of formal an informal care. Elderly people living in households in which the monthly income exceeds EUR 900 are five times more likely than people living in households in which the monthly income is less than EUR 600 to receive private care instead of public care. People older than 84 years are six times more likely to receive public care than people aged between 65 and 74. CONCLUSIONS: Men are two times more likely than women to receive exclusively informal care. Women are three times more likely than men to receive both kinds of care simultaneously. Formal care complements informal care. Private care is more common than public care. Men, people living in larger-sized households, and people with fewer socio-economic resources are more likely to receive informal care.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1590/s1135-57272009000300005

Cites

28 of 28 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

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

Show all 29 references

Research works printed but not linked: 7

  1. Francisco del Rey C y Mazarrasa Alvear L. Cuida- dos informales. Rev Enferm. 1995; 18(202): 61- 65.
  2. Castejón P, Esparza C & Abellán A. Salud, depen- dencia y cuidados. En IMSERSO, editor. A propó- sito de las condiciones de vida de las personas mayores. Madrid: IMSERSO; 2007. pp. 65-82.
  3. Walker AJ, Pratt CC & Eddy L. Informal Caregi- ving to Ageing Family Members: A critical review. Fam Relat. 1995; 44(4): 402-411.
  4. Twigg J. Cuidadores de los ancianos: modelos para un análisis. En Jamieson A y Illsley R, edito- res. Comparación de políticas europeas de aten- ción a las personas ancianas. Barcelona: SG Edi- tores; 1993. pp. 35-51.
  5. INE. Encuesta Nacional de Salud. Metodología. Instituto Nacional de Estadística; 2003. Rev Esp Salud Pública 2009, Vol. 83, N.° 3
  6. Norusis M. SPSS 13.0. Advanced Statistical Pro- cedures Companion. New Jersey: Prentice Hall; 2005.
  7. Rev Esp Salud Pública 2009, Vol. 83, N.° 3

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Rogero-García, J.
Venue
Revista Española de Salud Pública
Publisher
FapUNIFESP (SciELO)
Published
2009-06
Volume
83
Issue
3
Pages
393-405
ISSN
1135-5727 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1590/s1135-57272009000300005
OpenAlex
W2169152672
Cited by
83
References
29
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 9 · 2013: 5 · 2012: 7
FWCI
9.68
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by-nc-nd
Locations
  • Revista Española de Salud Pública (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Biblos-e Archivo (Universidad Autónoma de Madrid) (submittedVersion)
  • Dialnet (Universidad de la Rioja) (submittedVersion)
  • DIGITAL.CSIC (Spanish National Research Council (CSIC)) (submittedVersion)
  • LA Referencia (Red Federada de Repositorios Institucionales de Publicaciones Científicas) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
  • Hispana (submittedVersion)
  • Redalyc (Universidad Autónoma del Estado de México) (submittedVersion)
  • Scientific Electronic library online (Sciences Carlos III Health Institute) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Life-span and Life-course Studies › Aging, Elder Care, and Social Issues
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Aging, Health, and Disability
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Intergenerational Family Dynamics and Caregiving
Keywords
long-term care, informal care, formal care, older adults, socioeconomic disparities, private care, public care, household income, gender differences
MeSH terms
Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Female, Home Care Services, Humans, Male, Spain, Logistic Models

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