Irene J Higginson1, Wei Gao, Diana Jackson, Joanna Murray, Richard Harding. 1. King's College London, Department of Palliative Care, Policy and Rehabilitation, School of Medicine at Guy's, King's College and St Thomas' Hospitals, London, United Kingdom. irene.higginson@kcl.ac.uk <irene.higginson@kcl.ac.uk>
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To assess six short-form versions of Zarit Burden Interview (ZBI-12, ZBI-8, ZBI-7, ZBI-6, ZBI-4, and ZBI-1) among three caregiving populations. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: Secondary analysis of carers' surveys in advanced cancer (n=105), dementia (n=131), and acquired brain injury (n=215). All completed demographic information and the ZBI-22 were used. Validity was assessed by Spearman correlations and internal consistency using Cronbach's alpha. Overall discrimination ability was evaluated using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC). RESULTS: All short-form versions, except the ZBI-1 in advanced cancer (rho=0.63), displayed good correlations (rho=0.74-0.97) with the ZBI-22. Cronbach's alphas suggested high internal consistency (range: 0.69-0.89) even for the ZBI-4. Discriminative ability was good for all short forms (AUC range: 0.90-0.99); the best AUC was for ZBI-12 (0.99; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.98-0.99) and the second best for ZBI-7 (0.98; 95% CI: 0.96-0.98) and ZBI-6 (0.98; 95% CI: 0.97-0.99). CONCLUSIONS: All six short-form ZBI have very good validity, internal consistency, and discriminative ability. ZBI-12 is endorsed as the best short-form version; ZBI-7 and ZBI-6 show almost equal properties and are suitable when a fewer-question version is needed. ZBI-4 and ZBI-1 are suitable for screening, but ZBI-1 may be less valid in cancer.
OBJECTIVES: To assess six short-form versions of Zarit Burden Interview (ZBI-12, ZBI-8, ZBI-7, ZBI-6, ZBI-4, and ZBI-1) among three caregiving populations. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: Secondary analysis of carers' surveys in advanced cancer (n=105), dementia (n=131), and acquired brain injury (n=215). All completed demographic information and the ZBI-22 were used. Validity was assessed by Spearman correlations and internal consistency using Cronbach's alpha. Overall discrimination ability was evaluated using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC). RESULTS: All short-form versions, except the ZBI-1 in advanced cancer (rho=0.63), displayed good correlations (rho=0.74-0.97) with the ZBI-22. Cronbach's alphas suggested high internal consistency (range: 0.69-0.89) even for the ZBI-4. Discriminative ability was good for all short forms (AUC range: 0.90-0.99); the best AUC was for ZBI-12 (0.99; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.98-0.99) and the second best for ZBI-7 (0.98; 95% CI: 0.96-0.98) and ZBI-6 (0.98; 95% CI: 0.97-0.99). CONCLUSIONS: All six short-form ZBI have very good validity, internal consistency, and discriminative ability. ZBI-12 is endorsed as the best short-form version; ZBI-7 and ZBI-6 show almost equal properties and are suitable when a fewer-question version is needed. ZBI-4 and ZBI-1 are suitable for screening, but ZBI-1 may be less valid in cancer.
Authors: Katherine Ornstein; Joseph E Gaugler; D P Devanand; Nikos Scarmeas; Carolyn Zhu; Yaakov Stern Journal: Am J Geriatr Psychiatry Date: 2013-02-06 Impact factor: 4.105
Authors: Olivia I Okereke; Charles F Reynolds; David Mischoulon; Grace Chang; Nancy R Cook; Trisha Copeland; Georgina Friedenberg; Julie E Buring; JoAnn E Manson Journal: Contemp Clin Trials Date: 2018-03-08 Impact factor: 2.226
Authors: Jesús Rivera-Navarro; Rosa Sepúlveda; Israel Contador; Bernardino Fernández-Calvo; Francisco Ramos; Miguel Ángel Tola-Arribas; Miguel Goñi Journal: Eur J Ageing Date: 2017-04-20