Yue Zhou, Jie Zhang, Yufan Pan, Yu Dai, Yujian Sun, Yi Xiao, Fuyou Tang, Yufeng Yu
{"title":"衡量癌症患者家庭照顾者负担的工具：测量特性系统回顾》。","authors":"Yue Zhou, Jie Zhang, Yufan Pan, Yu Dai, Yujian Sun, Yi Xiao, Fuyou Tang, Yufeng Yu","doi":"10.1111/jocn.17548","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aims: </strong>This study identifies instruments for assessing the burden on family caregivers of cancer patients and evaluates their psychometric properties using COSMIN criteria.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>A systematic review based on COSMIN methodology.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The review adhered to PRISMA guidelines. Relevant studies were identified through searches in PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, Embase, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wanfang Database, and China Science and Technology Journal Database, covering literature from inception to September 2024. Included studies focused on developing or validating measurement tools and assessing psychometric properties such as reliability, internal consistency and construct validity. Two independent researchers screened the literature, extracted data and evaluated psychometric properties using COSMIN criteria while assessing evidence quality via the GRADE method.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 32 studies were included, encompassing 17 tools for assessing caregiver burden. None reported measurement error, cross-cultural validity or responsiveness. The Caregiver's Burden Scale in End-of-Life Care (CBS-EOLC) demonstrated strong reliability, validity and internal consistency, receiving a strong recommendation for clinical practice. In contrast, the Zarit Burden Interview (ZBI), Family Caregiver Burden Interview Scale (FBIS) and Bakas Caregiving Outcomes Scale (BCOS) are not recommended due to insufficient supporting evidence. Other tools showed weak evidence, leading to weak recommendations.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The CBS-EOLC exhibits comprehensive psychometric properties suitable for clinical applications. The ZBI, FBIS and BCOS lack adequate supporting evidence and are not recommended. Future research should focus on measurement error, cross-cultural validity and responsiveness to enhance these tools' applicability and reliability.</p><p><strong>Relevance to clinical practice: </strong>This review provides evidence for healthcare providers to select instruments for assessing caregiver burden in cancer patients.</p><p><strong>Impact: </strong>This systematic review highlights the need for comprehensive assessments of caregiver burden based on COSMIN guidelines.</p><p><strong>No patient or public contribution: </strong>This study is a systematic review with no patient or public participation.</p>","PeriodicalId":50236,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical Nursing","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Instruments for Measuring the Burden of Family Caregivers of Cancer Patients: A Systematic Review of Measurement Properties.\",\"authors\":\"Yue Zhou, Jie Zhang, Yufan Pan, Yu Dai, Yujian Sun, Yi Xiao, Fuyou Tang, Yufeng Yu\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/jocn.17548\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Aims: </strong>This study identifies instruments for assessing the burden on family caregivers of cancer patients and evaluates their psychometric properties using COSMIN criteria.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>A systematic review based on COSMIN methodology.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The review adhered to PRISMA guidelines. Relevant studies were identified through searches in PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, Embase, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wanfang Database, and China Science and Technology Journal Database, covering literature from inception to September 2024. Included studies focused on developing or validating measurement tools and assessing psychometric properties such as reliability, internal consistency and construct validity. Two independent researchers screened the literature, extracted data and evaluated psychometric properties using COSMIN criteria while assessing evidence quality via the GRADE method.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 32 studies were included, encompassing 17 tools for assessing caregiver burden. None reported measurement error, cross-cultural validity or responsiveness. The Caregiver's Burden Scale in End-of-Life Care (CBS-EOLC) demonstrated strong reliability, validity and internal consistency, receiving a strong recommendation for clinical practice. In contrast, the Zarit Burden Interview (ZBI), Family Caregiver Burden Interview Scale (FBIS) and Bakas Caregiving Outcomes Scale (BCOS) are not recommended due to insufficient supporting evidence. Other tools showed weak evidence, leading to weak recommendations.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The CBS-EOLC exhibits comprehensive psychometric properties suitable for clinical applications. The ZBI, FBIS and BCOS lack adequate supporting evidence and are not recommended. Future research should focus on measurement error, cross-cultural validity and responsiveness to enhance these tools' applicability and reliability.</p><p><strong>Relevance to clinical practice: </strong>This review provides evidence for healthcare providers to select instruments for assessing caregiver burden in cancer patients.</p><p><strong>Impact: </strong>This systematic review highlights the need for comprehensive assessments of caregiver burden based on COSMIN guidelines.</p><p><strong>No patient or public contribution: </strong>This study is a systematic review with no patient or public participation.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50236,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Clinical Nursing\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Clinical Nursing\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/jocn.17548\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"NURSING\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Clinical Nursing","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/jocn.17548","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"NURSING","Score":null,"Total":0}
Instruments for Measuring the Burden of Family Caregivers of Cancer Patients: A Systematic Review of Measurement Properties.
Aims: This study identifies instruments for assessing the burden on family caregivers of cancer patients and evaluates their psychometric properties using COSMIN criteria.
Design: A systematic review based on COSMIN methodology.
Methods: The review adhered to PRISMA guidelines. Relevant studies were identified through searches in PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, Embase, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wanfang Database, and China Science and Technology Journal Database, covering literature from inception to September 2024. Included studies focused on developing or validating measurement tools and assessing psychometric properties such as reliability, internal consistency and construct validity. Two independent researchers screened the literature, extracted data and evaluated psychometric properties using COSMIN criteria while assessing evidence quality via the GRADE method.
Results: A total of 32 studies were included, encompassing 17 tools for assessing caregiver burden. None reported measurement error, cross-cultural validity or responsiveness. The Caregiver's Burden Scale in End-of-Life Care (CBS-EOLC) demonstrated strong reliability, validity and internal consistency, receiving a strong recommendation for clinical practice. In contrast, the Zarit Burden Interview (ZBI), Family Caregiver Burden Interview Scale (FBIS) and Bakas Caregiving Outcomes Scale (BCOS) are not recommended due to insufficient supporting evidence. Other tools showed weak evidence, leading to weak recommendations.
Conclusions: The CBS-EOLC exhibits comprehensive psychometric properties suitable for clinical applications. The ZBI, FBIS and BCOS lack adequate supporting evidence and are not recommended. Future research should focus on measurement error, cross-cultural validity and responsiveness to enhance these tools' applicability and reliability.
Relevance to clinical practice: This review provides evidence for healthcare providers to select instruments for assessing caregiver burden in cancer patients.
Impact: This systematic review highlights the need for comprehensive assessments of caregiver burden based on COSMIN guidelines.
No patient or public contribution: This study is a systematic review with no patient or public participation.
期刊介绍：
The Journal of Clinical Nursing (JCN) is an international, peer reviewed, scientific journal that seeks to promote the development and exchange of knowledge that is directly relevant to all spheres of nursing practice. The primary aim is to promote a high standard of clinically related scholarship which advances and supports the practice and discipline of nursing. The Journal also aims to promote the international exchange of ideas and experience that draws from the different cultures in which practice takes place. Further, JCN seeks to enrich insight into clinical need and the implications for nursing intervention and models of service delivery. Emphasis is placed on promoting critical debate on the art and science of nursing practice.
JCN is essential reading for anyone involved in nursing practice, whether clinicians, researchers, educators, managers, policy makers, or students. The development of clinical practice and the changing patterns of inter-professional working are also central to JCN''s scope of interest. Contributions are welcomed from other health professionals on issues that have a direct impact on nursing practice.
We publish high quality papers from across the methodological spectrum that make an important and novel contribution to the field of clinical nursing (regardless of where care is provided), and which demonstrate clinical application and international relevance.
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
分享
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
扫码关注我们
