Clinical gerontologist · 2025
Profiles of Family Caregivers for Patients with Dementia in China: Implications for Tailored Intervention Development.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Chen Fang, Pan Shihua, Mei Jing, Ding Xiaomin, Sun Huimin
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: To identify psychological profiles of Chinese dementia caregivers and examine how socio-demographic factors influence high-risk profiles.
METHODS: In this cross-sectional study, 209 primary family caregivers were assessed using validated scales measuring caregiver stress, negative emotions, and cognitive/affective empathy. Latent profile analysis classified caregivers based on these measures, and multinomial logistic regression identified predictors of profile group.
RESULTS: Four profiles emerged: (1) Rational (7%: low stress/negative emotions, high cognitive empathy); (2) Adaptive (36%: moderate stress, balanced empathy); (3) Substantial Stress - High Affective Empathy (45%: near-clinical stress (CPSS = 29.59), high affective empathy); and (4) High Stress - Low Cognitive Empathy (12%: extreme stress (CPSS = 37.24), lowest cognitive empathy). Lack of caregiving assistance increased odds of high-risk profiles (OR = 6.09 and 4.84, p <.05). Low income strongly predicted membership in High Stress-Low Cognitive Empathy group (OR = 8.03, p = .006).
CONCLUSIONS: Over half of the caregivers (57%) fall into high-risk profiles characterized by dominance affective empathy, with systemic factors (e.g. lack of assistance and low income) exacerbating vulnerability. Cultural norms (e.g. filial piety) may contribute to these psychological patterns.
CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: Targeted cognitive empathy training for high-affective-empathy profile, income-based subsidies and respite care and culturally adapted interventions (e.g. reframing filial responsibility as shared duty) are recommended.
METHODS: In this cross-sectional study, 209 primary family caregivers were assessed using validated scales measuring caregiver stress, negative emotions, and cognitive/affective empathy. Latent profile analysis classified caregivers based on these measures, and multinomial logistic regression identified predictors of profile group.
RESULTS: Four profiles emerged: (1) Rational (7%: low stress/negative emotions, high cognitive empathy); (2) Adaptive (36%: moderate stress, balanced empathy); (3) Substantial Stress - High Affective Empathy (45%: near-clinical stress (CPSS = 29.59), high affective empathy); and (4) High Stress - Low Cognitive Empathy (12%: extreme stress (CPSS = 37.24), lowest cognitive empathy). Lack of caregiving assistance increased odds of high-risk profiles (OR = 6.09 and 4.84, p <.05). Low income strongly predicted membership in High Stress-Low Cognitive Empathy group (OR = 8.03, p = .006).
CONCLUSIONS: Over half of the caregivers (57%) fall into high-risk profiles characterized by dominance affective empathy, with systemic factors (e.g. lack of assistance and low income) exacerbating vulnerability. Cultural norms (e.g. filial piety) may contribute to these psychological patterns.
CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: Targeted cognitive empathy training for high-affective-empathy profile, income-based subsidies and respite care and culturally adapted interventions (e.g. reframing filial responsibility as shared duty) are recommended.