1984
DOI: 10.2307/584588
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A Family Impact Analysis: The Deinstitutionalization of the Mentally Ill

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
9
0

Year Published

1992
1992
2009
2009

Publication Types

Select...
7
1
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 25 publications
(10 citation statements)
references
References 4 publications
1
9
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Of the alliance members, 243 (32%) agreed to participate. Although this initial response rate is low, it falls within the 22-50% response range reported in other studies of the families of the seriously mentally ill (Anderson & Lynch, 1984;Hatfield, 1979b, Hatfield, Fierstein, & Johnson, 1982. A simple random sample of 132 respondents was then drawn from the list of 243 prospective participants and then contacted by telephone.…”
Section: Respondents and Proceduressupporting
confidence: 73%
“…Of the alliance members, 243 (32%) agreed to participate. Although this initial response rate is low, it falls within the 22-50% response range reported in other studies of the families of the seriously mentally ill (Anderson & Lynch, 1984;Hatfield, 1979b, Hatfield, Fierstein, & Johnson, 1982. A simple random sample of 132 respondents was then drawn from the list of 243 prospective participants and then contacted by telephone.…”
Section: Respondents and Proceduressupporting
confidence: 73%
“…In the developed world, family burden research in psychiatric disorders initially focused on studying the impact of deinstitutionalization (Anderson & Lynch, 1984;Grad & Sainsbury, 1963;Hoenig & Hamilton, 1966;Goldberg & Huxley, 1980). However subsequent research has focused on the different dimensions and predictors of burden, in addition to interventions in the management of burden (Roick et al, 2006;Perlick et al, 2006).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…During the last decades, the number of mental hospital beds have been reduced, and patients reside mainly in the community (1). Thus, close family members of the mentally ill have become even more important sources of social network and informal carers of the patients (2, 3).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%