View in EDS HTML Full Text PDF Full Text

The Gains Associated With Caregiving (GAC) Scale: Reliability and Validity of the Chinese Version.

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: The Gains Associated With Caregiving (GAC) Scale: Reliability and Validity of the Chinese Version.
Authors: Xiao, Hongmei (AUTHOR), Liu, Shuai (AUTHOR), Wang, Zhiwen (AUTHOR), Raut, Nivedita (AUTHOR)
Source: Perspectives in Psychiatric Care. 7/20/2026, Vol. 2026, p1-9. 9p.
Subjects: Treatment of dementia, Cross-sectional method, Multitrait multimethod techniques, Scale analysis (Psychology), Self-evaluation, Research funding, Cronbach's alpha, Disease duration, Research evaluation, Research methodology evaluation, Translations, Interviewing, Questionnaires, Pilot projects, Descriptive statistics, Chi-squared test, Caregivers, Thematic analysis, Psychometrics, Research methodology, Statistical reliability, Marital status, Intraclass correlation, Factor analysis, Medical care for older people, Comparative studies, Dementia patients
Geographic Terms: China
Abstract: This article describes the cross‐cultural adaptation and psychometric testing of the Chinese version of the gains associated with caregiving (GAC) scale. This tool is designed to measure self‐reported gains experienced by caregivers of people with dementia. The adaptation process entailed back‐translation and validation by a committee of experts. Content validity was analyzed using the content validity coefficient, and construct validity was analyzed by exploratory factor analysis and confirmatory factor analysis. The reliability of the scale was evaluated by using Cronbach's α coefficient and the test–retest reliability coefficient. With a cross‐sectional study design, we invited caregivers of people with dementia to complete the Chinese version of the GAC scale. Factor analysis suggested a four‐factor solution in which all 27 items were retained, accounting for 65.76% of the variance. Cronbach's α was 0.968, and the test–retest reliability coefficient was 0.886. The Chinese version of the GAC scale appears to be a valid and reliable scale for assessing perceived gains among family caregivers of people with dementia. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
Copyright of Perspectives in Psychiatric Care is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)
Database: Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection
Full text is not displayed to guests.
FullText Links:
  – Type: pdflink
Text:
  Availability: 1
Header DbId: pbh
DbLabel: Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection
An: 195498189
AccessLevel: 6
PubType: Academic Journal
PubTypeId: academicJournal
PreciseRelevancyScore: 0
IllustrationInfo
Items – Name: Title
  Label: Title
  Group: Ti
  Data: The Gains Associated With Caregiving (GAC) Scale: Reliability and Validity of the Chinese Version.
– Name: Author
  Label: Authors
  Group: Au
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Xiao%2C+Hongmei%22">Xiao, Hongmei</searchLink> (AUTHOR)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Liu%2C+Shuai%22">Liu, Shuai</searchLink> (AUTHOR)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Wang%2C+Zhiwen%22">Wang, Zhiwen</searchLink> (AUTHOR)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Raut%2C+Nivedita%22">Raut, Nivedita</searchLink> (AUTHOR)
– Name: TitleSource
  Label: Source
  Group: Src
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="JN" term="%22Perspectives+in+Psychiatric+Care%22">Perspectives in Psychiatric Care</searchLink>. 7/20/2026, Vol. 2026, p1-9. 9p.
– Name: Subject
  Label: Subjects
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Treatment+of+dementia%22">Treatment of dementia</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Cross-sectional+method%22">Cross-sectional method</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Multitrait+multimethod+techniques%22">Multitrait multimethod techniques</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Scale+analysis+%28Psychology%29%22">Scale analysis (Psychology)</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Self-evaluation%22">Self-evaluation</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Research+funding%22">Research funding</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Cronbach's+alpha%22">Cronbach's alpha</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Disease+duration%22">Disease duration</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Research+evaluation%22">Research evaluation</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Research+methodology+evaluation%22">Research methodology evaluation</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Translations%22">Translations</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Interviewing%22">Interviewing</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Questionnaires%22">Questionnaires</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Pilot+projects%22">Pilot projects</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Descriptive+statistics%22">Descriptive statistics</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Chi-squared+test%22">Chi-squared test</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Caregivers%22">Caregivers</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Thematic+analysis%22">Thematic analysis</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Psychometrics%22">Psychometrics</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Research+methodology%22">Research methodology</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Statistical+reliability%22">Statistical reliability</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Marital+status%22">Marital status</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Intraclass+correlation%22">Intraclass correlation</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Factor+analysis%22">Factor analysis</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Medical+care+for+older+people%22">Medical care for older people</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Comparative+studies%22">Comparative studies</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Dementia+patients%22">Dementia patients</searchLink>
– Name: SubjectGeographic
  Label: Geographic Terms
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22China%22">China</searchLink>
– Name: Abstract
  Label: Abstract
  Group: Ab
  Data: This article describes the cross‐cultural adaptation and psychometric testing of the Chinese version of the gains associated with caregiving (GAC) scale. This tool is designed to measure self‐reported gains experienced by caregivers of people with dementia. The adaptation process entailed back‐translation and validation by a committee of experts. Content validity was analyzed using the content validity coefficient, and construct validity was analyzed by exploratory factor analysis and confirmatory factor analysis. The reliability of the scale was evaluated by using Cronbach's α coefficient and the test–retest reliability coefficient. With a cross‐sectional study design, we invited caregivers of people with dementia to complete the Chinese version of the GAC scale. Factor analysis suggested a four‐factor solution in which all 27 items were retained, accounting for 65.76% of the variance. Cronbach's α was 0.968, and the test–retest reliability coefficient was 0.886. The Chinese version of the GAC scale appears to be a valid and reliable scale for assessing perceived gains among family caregivers of people with dementia. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
– Name: AbstractSuppliedCopyright
  Label:
  Group: Ab
  Data: <i>Copyright of Perspectives in Psychiatric Care is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract.</i> (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)
PLink https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=pbh&AN=195498189
RecordInfo BibRecord:
  BibEntity:
    Identifiers:
      – Type: doi
        Value: 10.1155/ppc/4620505
    Languages:
      – Code: eng
        Text: English
    PhysicalDescription:
      Pagination:
        PageCount: 9
        StartPage: 1
    Subjects:
      – SubjectFull: Treatment of dementia
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Cross-sectional method
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Multitrait multimethod techniques
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Scale analysis (Psychology)
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Self-evaluation
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Research funding
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Cronbach's alpha
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Disease duration
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Research evaluation
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Research methodology evaluation
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Translations
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Interviewing
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Questionnaires
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Pilot projects
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Descriptive statistics
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Chi-squared test
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Caregivers
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Thematic analysis
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Psychometrics
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Research methodology
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Statistical reliability
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Marital status
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Intraclass correlation
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Factor analysis
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Medical care for older people
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Comparative studies
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Dementia patients
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: China
        Type: general
    Titles:
      – TitleFull: The Gains Associated With Caregiving (GAC) Scale: Reliability and Validity of the Chinese Version.
        Type: main
  BibRelationships:
    HasContributorRelationships:
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Xiao, Hongmei
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Liu, Shuai
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Wang, Zhiwen
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Raut, Nivedita
    IsPartOfRelationships:
      – BibEntity:
          Dates:
            – D: 20
              M: 07
              Text: 7/20/2026
              Type: published
              Y: 2026
          Identifiers:
            – Type: issn-print
              Value: 00315990
          Numbering:
            – Type: volume
              Value: 2026
          Titles:
            – TitleFull: Perspectives in Psychiatric Care
              Type: main
ResultId 1