Skip to content
PaperFren

Stress

How do you measure hardiness in AD caregivers?

Hosseini L, Sharif Nia H, Ashghali Farahani M · Frontiers in psychology · 2022

Open access · cc by · source: Europe PMC

Among 435 Iranian AD family caregivers, the new FCHS showed five factors explaining 58.72% variance with acceptable CFA fit and reliability.

Save to libraryView originalAsk PaperFrenStudy this in NoteFren
Watch this

How this study connects

Role on claims

Each row is a claim on a concept or method page where this paper supports, challenges, or qualifies the statement. Roles are hand-checked — not a model guess.

Not yet placed on a claim. This paper has study layers, but no concept page yet cites it as support, challenge, or qualifier.

Study at a glance

Design
Cross-sectional — Sequential-exploratory mixed-method scale development (qual items + EFA/CFA psychometrics)
N
N=435 · Family caregivers in psychometric step; mean age 50.26
Population
Iranian family caregivers of patients with Alzheimer’s disease
Outcome
Validity/reliability of Family Caregivers’ Hardiness Scale (FCHS)

Structured fields used in claim comparison tables when every cited study has a complete layer.

Inspect source passages

How do you measure hardiness in AD caregivers?

These passages occur verbatim in the stored paper text. They support the points listed below; they do not verify every statement in the explanation.

435 caregivers; mean age 50.26.

In the psychometric step, the samples were 435 family caregivers with a mean age of 50.26 (SD ± 13.24), and the data were gathered via an online form questionnaire.

Five factors explained 58.72% variance.

FCHS consists of five factors, namely, “Religious Coping” (5 items), “Self-Management” (6 items), “Empathic Communication” (3 items), “Family Affective Commitment” (3 items), and “Purposeful Interaction” (4 items) that explained 58.72% of the total variance.
Read passages in the original paper

Key findings

Five factors (religious coping, self-management, empathic communication, family affective commitment, purposeful interaction); good CFA fit and acceptable reliability/stability.

Methodology

Clarified hardiness via content analysis, then tested face/content validity and EFA/CFA psychometrics on an online caregiver sample.

Limitations

Scale validation in one cultural sample does not prove intervention effects of raising hardiness scores.

Related papers in this topic

Same topic cluster — not a recommendation engine.