Get help now — free helplines

You can call any of these for free. You do not need a diagnosis, an appointment, or a crisis to call — questions and plain exhaustion are reasons enough.

  • Alzheimer's Association 24/7 Helpline 800-272-3900 24 hours a day, 365 days a year Free, confidential support and information for people with dementia, caregivers, families and the public. Master's-level clinicians. Also Spanish.
  • 988 Suicide & Crisis Lifeline 988 24/7 Call or text 988, or chat at 988lifeline.org. For anyone in emotional distress or a mental-health crisis, including caregivers.
  • Alzheimer's Foundation of America (AFA) Helpline 866-232-8484 9:00 am - 9:00 pm ET, seven days a week Licensed social workers providing support, info and referrals. Also text message and web chat. Text: 646-586-5283

In a medical emergency, call 911. More numbers, and what each line does, on the help page.

This page is alzhub.org's plain-English summary of a published study, not the paper itself. It is generated from the record we hold for this study, sourced and linked below — check the original for the full text and methods.

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 64 out of 100. Caregiving

Topic: Risk, prevention and care in population studies

Objectives To assess six short-form versions of Zarit Burden Interview (ZBI-12, ZBI-8, ZBI-7, ZBI-6, ZBI-4, and ZBI-1) among three caregiving populations. Study design and setting Secondary analysis of carers' surveys in advanced cancer (n=105), dementia (n=131), and acquired brain injury (n=215). All completed demographic information and the ZBI-22 were used. Validity was assessed by Spearman correlations and internal consistency using Cronbach's alpha. Overall discrimination ability was evaluated using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC). Results All short-form versions, except the ZBI-1 in advanced cancer (rho=0.63), displayed good correlations (rho=0.74-0.97) with the ZBI-22. Cronbach's alphas suggested high internal consistency (range: 0.69-0.89) even for the ZBI-4. Discriminative ability was good for all short forms (AUC range: 0.90-0.99); the best AUC was for ZBI-12 (0.99; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.98-0.99) and the second best for ZBI-7 (0.98; 95% CI: 0.96-0.98) and ZBI-6 (0.98; 95% CI: 0.97-0.99). Conclusions All six short-form ZBI have very good validity, internal consistency, and discriminative ability. ZBI-12 is endorsed as the best short-form version; ZBI-7 and ZBI-6 show almost equal properties and are suitable when a fewer-question version is needed. ZBI-4 and ZBI-1 are suitable for screening, but ZBI-1 may be less valid in cancer.

Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris

APA 7th

Higginson, I. J., Gao, W., Jackson, D., Murray, J., & Harding, R. (2010). Short-form Zarit Caregiver Burden Interviews were valid in advanced conditions. Journal of clinical epidemiology. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2009.06.014

Vancouver

Higginson IJ, Gao W, Jackson D, Murray J, Harding R. Short-form Zarit Caregiver Burden Interviews were valid in advanced conditions. Journal of clinical epidemiology. 2010. doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2009.06.014. PMID: 19836205.

BibTeX

@article{higginson2010-19836205,
  author  = {Higginson, I. J. and Gao, W. and Jackson, D. and Murray, J. and Harding, R.},
  title   = {{Short-form Zarit Caregiver Burden Interviews were valid in advanced conditions}},
  journal = {Journal of clinical epidemiology},
  year    = {2010},
  doi     = {10.1016/j.jclinepi.2009.06.014},
  pmid    = {19836205},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2009.06.014}
}

Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. Check the citation against the original before you use it.

Key findings

Why it matters

This study tested six short versions of a questionnaire that measures the burden felt by people caring for someone with dementia, and found most were valid and reliable. It is a tool for measuring caregiver burden, not a treatment, cure or prevention for Alzheimer's disease.

Study details

How this study scored 64/100
How this study's score is builtJournal tier 7 of 10; Journal's citation record 3 of 4; Study design 12 of 12; Strength of evidence 1 of 5; Peer-review validation 10 of 10; How recent 1 of 5; Sample size 2 of 4; Effect reported 0 of 3; Studied in people 3 of 3; Randomised / blinded 0 of 2; Times cited 6 of 7; Citations per year 3 of 5; Impact for its field and year 4 of 6; Cited by studies here 2 of 6; Still being cited 3 of 4; Senior author's track record 3 of 4; Institution's track record 1 of 3; Multi-centre collaboration 1 of 3; Indexed in PubMed 2 of 2; Free to read 0 of 2. Total 64 of 100.64 of 100 points earned36 not earned

Published in a peer-reviewed journal, and it is a meta-analysis pooling many studies. Scored zero for effect reported because the record does not state it.

ComponentPointsWhy
Journal tier 7 / 10 Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Journal of clinical epidemiology)
Journal's citation record 3 / 4 Journal of Clinical Epidemiology: journal h-index 339 (OpenAlex, 2026-10-29)
Study design 12 / 12 A meta-analysis pooling many studies (from PubMed type “Meta-Analysis”)
Strength of evidence 1 / 5 Rated “low” in our summary
Peer-review validation 10 / 10 Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal.
How recent 1 / 5 2010 — within 20 year(s) of the newest study here
Sample size 2 / 4 105 participants
Effect reported 0 / 3 No effect size reported — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Studied in people 3 / 3 Studied in people (participant count stated)
Randomised / blinded 0 / 2 A review of other studies — randomisation is not credited here
Times cited 6 / 7 Cited 340 times (OpenAlex, 2026-10-10)
Citations per year 3 / 5 18.9 citations a year over 18 year(s) since 2010
Impact for its field and year 4 / 6 Cited 14.4× the average for papers of its field and year (OpenAlex FWCI)
Cited by studies here 2 / 6 Cited by 5 other studies in this library
Still being cited 3 / 4 Cited 96 times in 2024–2026 (2026 still in progress; OpenAlex)
Senior author's track record 3 / 4 Last-listed author Richard Harding: h-index 88 (OpenAlex, whole career)
Institution's track record 1 / 3 King's College London: institution h-index 1,348 (OpenAlex)
Multi-centre collaboration 1 / 3 OpenAlex lists 2 institution(s) in 1 country
Indexed in PubMed 2 / 2 Indexed in PubMed (PMID 19836205)
Free to read 0 / 2 Behind a paywall — scores zero
Total 64 / 100 —

What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →

Read the original

May need a subscription OpenAlex found no free copy of the full text (checked 6 Feb 1020), so the publisher may charge for it. The PubMed abstract is free.

Studies this one cites

Referenced by this study and also in the alzhub library, so you can read them here.

Later studies that cite this one

5 studies in the alzhub library list this one in their references.

Related studies in Caregiving

Also tagged “delirium”

858 studies in the library carry the topic tag “delirium”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 858 tagged studies.

Similar studies

More on Caregiving

See all studies in Caregiving →