↓ Skip to main content

Professional Care Team Burden (PCTB) scale – reliability, validity and factor analysis

Overview of attention for article published in Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, February 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (92nd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (96th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
2 news outlets
twitter
1 X user
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
14 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
127 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Professional Care Team Burden (PCTB) scale – reliability, validity and factor analysis
Published in
Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, February 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12955-014-0199-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Stefanie Auer, Elmar Graessel, Carmen Viereckl, Ursula Kienberger, Edith Span, Katharina Luttenberger

Abstract

There is growing concern about how to provide care for persons with dementia in institutions such as nursing homes, day care centers, mobile services and hospitals. Care teams (formal caregivers) have to meet specific expectations from different sides: the Person with Dementia herself, the institution, and from different family members. Out of this situation, considerable burden can emerge hindering the professional development of care team members and counteracting quality of care of care recipients. So far there are very few specific reliable and valid scales measuring burden in care team members. Based on the theoretical concept of subjectively perceived burden, organizationally based factors of burden and structural factors of burden, we report on the construction of a care team burden scale and its scale quality criteria. Based on the theoretical three assumed sources of burden, a structured interview guide was developed. Interviews were held with professional caregivers. Through qualitative data analysis, an item pool consisting of 40 Items was constructed. Experts selected 19 items found most appropriate to measure the three theoretically based domains of burden. The Perceived Stress Scale (PSS) was chosen as a criterion in order to test discriminant validity. An exploratory factor analysis was performed. The stepwise scale analysis revealed a 10 item solution. The Cronbach's alpha was 0.785. The Pearson correlation between the PCTB 10 Item scale (mean score 10.2, SD = 5.0) and the PSS (mean score 13.0, SD = 5.9) was 0.46 (p < 0.001). All included items could clearly be assigned to one of three factors. The 10 item PCTB scale provides a valid and reliable means of obtaining ratings of burden from formal care teams working in nursing homes in order to evaluate different interventions targeted at the reduction of burden in care teams.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 127 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 <1%
Unknown 126 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 20 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 18 14%
Student > Bachelor 12 9%
Researcher 11 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 5%
Other 19 15%
Unknown 41 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 27 21%
Medicine and Dentistry 18 14%
Psychology 13 10%
Social Sciences 10 8%
Neuroscience 3 2%
Other 12 9%
Unknown 44 35%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 18. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 07 November 2016.
All research outputs
#1,745,971
of 22,787,797 outputs
Outputs from Health and Quality of Life Outcomes
#88
of 2,159 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#26,757
of 352,559 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Health and Quality of Life Outcomes
#1
of 32 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,787,797 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,159 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.4. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 352,559 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 32 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.