ArticleBMC public health2025
Cut-off score for the short form informal caregiver burden assessment questionnaire for predicting depression.
Article in BMC public health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCaregiver burden is associated with long-term caregiving, which can manifest through physical and emotional issues, including stress, anxiety, depression, and exhaustion. Assessing caregiver burden allows for determining its impact and monitoring its evolution, aiding in professional intervention and the implementation of health-promoting measures. This study aimed to determine the cut-off score of the Informal Caregiver Burden Assessment Questionnaire in its short form version (QASCI-VR) to identify caregivers at risk of anxiety and depression.
methodsA secondary study that used data from two primary studies conducted with informal caregivers in northern Portugal. The sample consisted of 201 family caregivers. The SF36 Quality of Life Questionnaire and Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) were utilised.
resultsThe prevalence of depression among caregivers was high (40.8%). Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) curve analysis showed an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.82 for predicting anxiety and depression, with a cut-off point of 40 providing 82% accuracy, 78% sensitivity, and 75% specificity. Cluster analysis confirmed that the QASCI-VR is a measure that discriminates between participants with and without depression.
conclusionThe QASCI-VR cut-off score of 40 provides healthcare professionals with a validated threshold for identifying caregivers at high risk of anxiety and depression, with good discriminatory accuracy. This cut-off enables early detection and timely intervention, facilitating more accurate screening and monitoring of caregiver burden in clinical practice. The study addresses a critical gap by establishing an evidence-based reference point for clinical decision-making in caregiver mental health assessment.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.