Jeffrey Yong Ming Siow1, Angelique Chan2, Truls Østbye2, Grand H-L Cheng3, Rahul Malhotra2. 1. Duke-NUS Medical School, Singapore. 2. Centre for Ageing Research and Education, and Health Services and Systems Research, Duke-NUS Medical School, Singapore. 3. Centre for Ageing Research and Education, Duke-NUS Medical School, Singapore.
Abstract
Purpose of the Study: To (a) assess the validity and reliability of the 9-item Positive Aspects of Caregiving (PAC) scale among a national sample of caregivers for older adults with functional limitations, (b) develop a shorter version (short-PAC [S-PAC] scale) and assess its psychometric properties, and (c) investigate both scales' measurement equivalence/invariance (ME/I) across language of administration (Chinese/English/Malay). Design and Methods: Scale/item measurement property assessment, confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), testing the "original" 2-factor model (6 items: first factor; 3 items: second factor), and exploratory FA (EFA) of the 9-item PAC scale was done. Consequently, alternate CFA models were tested. The S-PAC was developed and subjected to CFA. For both scales, convergent (correlation with caregiver esteem) and divergent (correlation with caregiver depressive symptoms) validity, and language ME/I was assessed. Results: For the 9-item PAC scale, the "original" 2-factor CFA model had a poor fit; its EFA and scale/item measurement properties supported a single factor. Among alternate CFA models, a bi-factor model (all nine items: first factor [overall PAC]; six items: second factor [self-affirmation]; three items: third factor [outlook-on-life]) had the best fit. The bi-factor CFA model also had a good fit for the S-PAC scale, developed after eliminating 2 items from the 9-item PAC scale. Both scales demonstrated convergent and divergent validity, and partial ME/I across language of administration. Implications: Both the 9-item PAC and 7-item S-PAC scales can be used to assess positive feelings resulting from care provision among family caregivers of older adults with functional limitations.
Purpose of the Study: To (a) assess the validity and reliability of the 9-item Positive Aspects of Caregiving (PAC) scale among a national sample of caregivers for older adults with functional limitations, (b) develop a shorter version (short-PAC [S-PAC] scale) and assess its psychometric properties, and (c) investigate both scales' measurement equivalence/invariance (ME/I) across language of administration (Chinese/English/Malay). Design and Methods: Scale/item measurement property assessment, confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), testing the "original" 2-factor model (6 items: first factor; 3 items: second factor), and exploratory FA (EFA) of the 9-item PAC scale was done. Consequently, alternate CFA models were tested. The S-PAC was developed and subjected to CFA. For both scales, convergent (correlation with caregiver esteem) and divergent (correlation with caregiver depressive symptoms) validity, and language ME/I was assessed. Results: For the 9-item PAC scale, the "original" 2-factor CFA model had a poor fit; its EFA and scale/item measurement properties supported a single factor. Among alternate CFA models, a bi-factor model (all nine items: first factor [overall PAC]; six items: second factor [self-affirmation]; three items: third factor [outlook-on-life]) had the best fit. The bi-factor CFA model also had a good fit for the S-PAC scale, developed after eliminating 2 items from the 9-item PAC scale. Both scales demonstrated convergent and divergent validity, and partial ME/I across language of administration. Implications: Both the 9-item PAC and 7-item S-PAC scales can be used to assess positive feelings resulting from care provision among family caregivers of older adults with functional limitations.
Authors: Reed W R Bratches; Noah Z Freundlich; J Nicholas Dionne-Odom; A James O'Malley; Paul J Barr Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2022-04-13 Impact factor: 3.006
Authors: Irene J Higginson; Deokhee Yi; Bridget M Johnston; Karen Ryan; Regina McQuillan; Lucy Selman; Stephen Z Pantilat; Barbara A Daveson; R Sean Morrison; Charles Normand Journal: BMC Med Date: 2020-11-03 Impact factor: 8.775