CHARACTERISTICS OF BURDEN ASSOCIATED WITH CARING FOR OLDER FAMILY MEMBERS WITH DYSPHAGIA ACROSS TIME
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Caregivers often experience increased burden resulting in reduced health and quality of life. Underexplored in its impact on burden is the effect of dysphagia (swallowing difficulties) over time. The purpose of this study was to explore the characteristics of burden associated with caring for an individual with dysphagia across an aging cohort. Using the Round 1, 5, 7, and 11 surveys from the National Health and Aging Trends Study and the National Study of Caregiving, we analyzed data from 4,662 spousal and children caregivers caring for community-dwelling family aged 65+. Outcome variables included caregivers’ emotional, financial, and physical burden and their agreement with statements about their well-being. A design-based conversion of the Pearson chi square statistic and binary logistic regressions were used to explain and predict presence of burden, its extent, and characteristics dependent on presence of dysphagia. At any given time, 16-27% of respondents were caring for family with dysphagia. Caregiver burden was more often reported by those caring for family with dysphagia than those without. For spouses and daughters, the degree of burden was almost always rated higher among those caring for family with dysphagia, with significant differences observed in levels of emotional and physical burden. Further, caregivers of family with dysphagia were significantly more likely to report having little time for themselves and feeling depressed, lonely, and that caregiving was too much to handle. Ultimately, dysphagia’s potential impact on the emotional, financial, and physical well-being of family caregivers must be considered along the care trajectory.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".