CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 288Dementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchNursing care and researchFamily Caregiving in Mental Illness

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 32 of the 32 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Validity and Reliability of the Zarit Burden Interview in Assessing Caregiving Burden

Open access
Seng, Boon Kheng, Luo, Nan, Ng, Wai Yee, Lim, June, Chionh, Hui Ling, Goh, Jenny, Yap, Philip·2010·Annals of the Academy of Medicine Singapore
DOI 10.47102/annals-acadmedsg.v39n10p758
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: This study aims to validate the Zarit Burden Interview as an instrument to measure the level of burden experienced by caregivers of patients with dementia (PWD) in Singapore. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Adult family caregivers of PWD were recruited from the ambulatory dementia clinic of a tertiary hospital and the Alzheimer's Disease Association. All subjects completed a battery of questionnaires which consisted of demographic questions and the following instruments: the Zarit Burden Interview (ZBI), Burden Assessment Scale (BAS), General Health Questionnaire (GHQ-28), Dementia Management Strategies Scale (DMSS), and the Revised Memory and Behaviour Problems Checklist (RMBPC). A subgroup of subjects also completed the ZBI for the second time 2 weeks after the fi rst survey. RESULTS: A total of 238 subjects completed the survey. As hypothesised, the Zarit burden score was strongly correlated with BAS, GHQ-28, DMSS, and RMBPC scores (Pearson's correlation coefficient: 0.53 to 0.73); caregivers who undertook the major role in caregiving, had spent >1 year in caregiving, or experienced financial problems had higher Zarit burden scores than those who were not main carers, with ≤1 year of caregiving, or reported no/minimal financial problems, respectively. The Cronbach's alpha value for the ZBI items was 0.93; the intra-class correlation coefficient for the test-retest reliability of the Zarit burden score was 0.89 (n = 149). CONCLUSION: The results in this study demonstrated that the Zarit Burden Interview is a valid and reliable instrument for measuring the burden of caregivers of PWD in Singapore.

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 · 10.47102/annals-acadmedsg.v39n10p758

Cites

32 of 32 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

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Juniper EF, Guyatt GH, Jaeschke R. How to develop and validate a new health-related quality of life instrument. In: Spilker B, editor. Quality of Life and Pharmacoeconomics in Clinical Trials. Philadelphia: Lippincott-Raven, 1996.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 288

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Seng, B. K., Luo, N., Ng, W. Y., Lim, J., Chionh, H. L., Goh, J., & Yap, P.
Affiliations
  • National University of Singapore (SG)
  • Alexandra Hospital (SG)
ORCID
Venue
Annals of the Academy of Medicine Singapore
Publisher
Academy of Medicine, Singapore
Published
2010-10-15
Volume
39
Issue
10
Pages
758-763
ISSN
0304-4602 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.47102/annals-acadmedsg.v39n10p758
OpenAlex
W126441541
Cited by
288
References
32
Citations by year
2026: 20 · 2025: 22 · 2024: 25 · 2023: 41 · 2022: 27 · 2021: 28 · 2020: 31 · 2019: 22 · 2018: 16 · 2017: 10 · 2016: 10 · 2015: 15 · 2014: 13 · 2013: 3 · 2012: 2
FWCI
1.73
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Annals of the Academy of Medicine Singapore (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • National University of Singapore (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Dementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
  • Health Sciences › Nursing › Research and Theory › Nursing care and research
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Family Caregiving in Mental Illness
Keywords
Zarit Burden Interview, caregiver burden, dementia, family caregivers, psychometric validation, test-retest reliability, Singapore
MeSH terms
Adult, Dementia, Female, Humans, Interview, Psychological, Male, Middle Aged, Psychiatric Status Rating Scales, Stress, Psychological, Caregivers, Cost of Illness

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