Back

Characterization of groups of informal caregivers. A cluster analysis using the example of Saxony.

Tischendorf, T.; Geithner, S.; Schaal, T.

2023-11-03 nursing
10.1101/2023.11.01.23297767 medRxiv
Show abstract

BackgroundAs a result of demographic change, a further increase in the number of people in need of care in Germany can be expected in the future. Nursing activities performed by family members are a central component of care provision. The assumption of support services is increasingly associated with an additional physical and psychological burden on informal caregivers. The aim of this study is to identify and characterize groups of informal caregivers with regard to their well-being. MethodologyThe empirical study was based on a survey on home care in Saxony from 2019, which was intended as exploratory work to provide insights into the care situation in Saxony. The central component is a two-step cluster analysis with exclusively informal caregivers. ResultsThe net sample size for the cluster analysis comprised 178 subjects who were involved in caring for relatives. The cluster analysis revealed two groups of caregiving relatives in Saxony, which were differentiated by a different experience of stress and various sociodemographic factors. DiscussionInformal caregivers in Saxony are not a homogeneous group. Depending on various sociodemographic factors or the care effort and situation, they are confronted with different challenges in caring for relatives, which are directly reflected in their well-being. In order to achieve a targeted reduction in the burden on family caregivers, cooperation and constructive collaboration between political decision-makers, care and health insurers, and the various players in health and care provision is required.

Matching journals

The top 1 journal accounts for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.