↓ Skip to main content

A Canadian qualitative study exploring the diversity of the experience of family caregivers of older adults with multiple chronic conditions using a social location perspective

Overview of attention for article published in International Journal for Equity in Health, March 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
62 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
204 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
A Canadian qualitative study exploring the diversity of the experience of family caregivers of older adults with multiple chronic conditions using a social location perspective
Published in
International Journal for Equity in Health, March 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12939-016-0328-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Allison Williams, Bharati Sethi, Wendy Duggleby, Jenny Ploeg, Maureen Markle-Reid, Shelley Peacock, Sunita Ghosh

Abstract

A little-studied issue in the provision of care at home by informal caregivers is the increase in older adult patients with chronic illness, and more specifically, multiple chronic conditions (MCC). We know little about the caregiving experience for this population, particularly as it is affected by social location, which refers to either a group's or individual's place/location in society at a given time, based on their intersecting demographics (age, gender, education, race, immigration status, geography, etc.). We have yet to fully comprehend the combined influence of these intersecting axes on caregivers' health and wellbeing, and attempt to do this by using an intersectionality approach in answering the following research question: How does social location influence the experience of family caregivers of older adults with MCC? The data presented herein is a thematic analysis of a qualitative sub-set of a large two-province study conducted using a repeated-measures embedded mixed method design. A survey sub-set of 20 survey participants per province (n = 40 total) were invited to participate in a semi-structured interview. In the first stage of data analysis, Charmaz's (2006) Constructivist Grounded Theory Method (CGTM) was used to develop initial codes, focused codes, categories and descriptive themes. In the second and the third stages of analysis, intersectionality was used to develop final analytical themes. The following four themes describe the overall study findings: (1) Caregiving Trajectory, where three caregiving phases were identified; (2) Work, Family, and Caregiving, where the impact of caregiving was discussed on other areas of caregivers' lives; (3) Personal and Structural Determinants of Caregiving, where caregiving sustainability and coping were deliberated, and; (4) Finding Meaning/Self in Caregiving, where meaning-making was highlighted. The intersectionality approach presented a number of axes of diversity as comparatively more important than others; these included gender, age, education, employment status, ethnicity, and degree of social connectedness. This can inform caregiver policy and programs to sustain health and well-being.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users 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 204 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Chile 1 <1%
Unknown 203 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 30 15%
Student > Master 28 14%
Student > Bachelor 27 13%
Researcher 23 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 23 11%
Other 30 15%
Unknown 43 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 56 27%
Social Sciences 35 17%
Medicine and Dentistry 23 11%
Psychology 16 8%
Engineering 7 3%
Other 17 8%
Unknown 50 25%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 14 March 2016.
All research outputs
#14,842,329
of 22,856,968 outputs
Outputs from International Journal for Equity in Health
#1,489
of 1,908 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#167,533
of 298,626 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal for Equity in Health
#35
of 42 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,856,968 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,908 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.2. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 298,626 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 42 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.