PURPOSE: To introduce, describe, and evaluate the Caregiver Motivation Appraisal Scale (CMAS), an 11item instrument developed to assess voluntary and obligatory caregiving motivations. METHOD: Psychometric properties of the CMAS were evaluated in a sample of 222 caregivers. Items were generated from qualitative interviews, and exploratory factor analysis (EFA) using principal axis factoring followed by confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was used to examine the factor structure. RESULTS: EFA supported a two-factor structure comprising an eight-item voluntary motivation subscale and a three-item obligatory motivation subscale, accounting for 64.07% of the variance. The CMAS demonstrated strong internal consistency (alpha = 0.83). CFA indicated good model fit (comparative fit index = 0.96, goodness of fit index = 0.91, root mean square error of approximation = 0.06, standardized root mean square residual = 0.08). CONCLUSION: Findings support the initial development and preliminary validation of the CMAS, contributing to understanding caregiver motivation and its potential implications for caregiver well-being research. Future work should refine the obligatory motivation subscale and validate the instrument across diverse caregiver populations.
Purpose: Primary stressors, such as frailty and caregiver burden, are predominant contributors to caregivers' depressive symptoms, but mechanisms underlying these relationships remain unknown. Method: Path analysis was used to test whether mastery and competence mediate the effect of frailty and caregiver burden on depressive symptoms, and whether social support moderates these pathways among 464 caregivers of frail older adults in China. Results: Mastery mediated the relationship between physical frailty and depressive symptoms, and competence mediated the relationship between caregiver burden and depressive symptoms. Social support moderated the relationship between physical frailty and mastery, as well as between caregiver burden and competence. Social support buffered the indirect negative influence of physical frailty on depressive symptoms via mastery, and that of caregiver burden on depressive symptoms via competence. Psychological and social frailty were non-significant. Conclusion: Interventions targeting social support, mastery, and competence enhancement may protect caregivers' mental well-being against care-related stressors.
PURPOSE: To validate and compare the psychometric properties of the Alzheimer's Disease Knowledge Scale Vietnam Version (ADKS-V), Dementia Knowledge Assessment Tool Version Two (DKAT2-V), and 27-item Dementia Knowledge Assessment Scale Vietnam Version (DKAS-V). METHOD: A cross-sectional study surveyed 360 community-dwelling older adults and 394 primary care nurses in Ho Chi Minh City. RESULTS: The scales demonstrated strong content validity (.86 to .91), convergent validity (r = .698 to .770), and reliability (Kuder-Richardson 20 [KR-20] = .765 to .820, omega = .793 to .849). Unidimensional confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) fit was poor. In contrast, target-population-specific orthogonal bifactor CFA models confirmed superior fit (comparative fit index = .939 to .981, root mean square error ofapproxima-tion = .031 to .049) over unidimensional structures. High general factor strength (omega H = .571 to .811) and negligible specific subscale variance (mostly <.15) justified single composite scoring. CONCLUSION: All three Vietnamese versions are culturally appropriate and robust. We recommend DKAT2-V for nursing education, ADKS-V for community screening, and DKAS-V as a universal epidemiological tool.
Purpose: Pragmatic clinical trials are essential for moving evidence-based practices into routine care for people living with dementia, yet few early career researchers (ECRs) receive formal preparation to design or conduct such trials. Method: This methods-focused article synthesizes lessons learned by ECRs using pragmatic data sources across nursing, social work, neuropsychology, occupational therapy, and speech-language pathology. Guidance was organized on four principles: engaging partners across roles and care levels; including representative participants; attending to organizational strain and readiness; and learning from adaptations. Results: Case examples show how teams identify and use existing data, collaborate with care teams and families to collect data in a feasible manner, tailor methods to cultural and linguistic contexts, and balance fidelity with necessary flexibility during implementation. Conclusion: Situated within these principles, this methods-focused article offers practical direction to advance pragmatic trials in dementia care and supports early career development.
