The Family Relationship Index (FRI) measures family cohesion, expressiveness and conflict. This study aimed to investigate its reliability and validity in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD). Confirmatory factor analysis was performed on 1657 patients and on subgroups according to socio-demographics and medical variables. Two items with poor saturation were excluded. The indexes indicated an acceptable fit. Reliability was especially weak for expressiveness. Our results provide partial support for the use of the French-version of the FRI in patients with advanced CKD. The family relationship index should be used with caution, especially in certain subgroups and for the expressiveness subscale.
Berkhout-ByrneNGaasbeekAMallatMJK, et al. (2017) Regret about the decision to start dialysis: A cross-sectional Dutch national survey. Netherlands Journal of Medicine75(6): 225–234.
2.
ChanD (2011) Advances in analytical strategies. In ZedeckS (ed.) APA Handbook of Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Vol 1: Building and Developing the Organization. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association, pp. 85–113.
3.
ChenFF (2008) What happens if we compare chopsticks with forks? The impact of making inappropriate comparisons in cross-cultural research. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology95(5): 1005–1018.
4.
DevinsGMHunsleyJMandinH, et al. (1997) The marital context of end-stage renal disease: Illness intrusiveness and perceived changes in family environment. Annals of Behavioral Medicine19(4): 325–332.
5.
EdwardsBClarkeV (2005) The validity of the family relationships index as a screening tool for psychological risk in families of cancer patients. Psycho-Oncology14(7): 546–554.
FornellCLarckerDF (1981) Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research18(1), 39–50.
8.
HairJFBlackWCBabinBJ, et al. (eds) (2014) Multivariate Data Analysis (7th edn., Pearson new internat ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.
9.
HogeRDAndrewsDAFaulknerP, et al. (1989) The family relationship index: Validity data. Journal of Clinical Psychology45(6): 897–903.
10.
HooperDCoughlanJMullenMR (2008) Structural equation modelling: Guidelines for determining model fit structural equation modelling: Guidelines for determining model fit. The Electronic Journal of Business Research Methods6(1): 53–60.
11.
HungerbuehlerIVollrathMELandoltMA (2011) Posttraumatic growth in mothers and fathers of children with severe illnesses. Journal of Health Psychology16(8): 1259–1267.
12.
KissaneDWBlochS (2002) Family Focused Grief Therapy: A Model of Family Centred Care during Palliative Care and Bereavement. Buckingham, UK: Open University Press.
13.
LarsenAOlsonDH (1990) Capturing the complexity of family systems: Integrating family theory, family scores, and family analysis. In: DraperTWMarcosAC (eds) Family variables: Conceptualization, measurement, and use. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications, Inc. pp. 19–47.
14.
MargolaDFenaroliVSorgenteA, et al. (2017) The Family Relationships Index (FRI): Multilevel confirmatory factor analysis in an Italian community sample. European Journal of Psychological Assessment35(3): 335–345.
15.
McDonaldRP (2011) Test Theory: A Unified Treatment. New York, NY: Routledge Taylor & Francis Group.
16.
MoosRH (1990) Conceptual and empirical approaches to developing family-based assessment procedures: Resolving the case of the family environment scale. Family Process29(2): 199–208. DOI: 10.1111/j.1545-5300.1990.00199.x.
17.
MoosRHMoosBS (2002) Family Environment Scale Manual: Development, Applications, Research. (3;rd edn.) Palo Alto, CA: Stanford University Medical Centers.
18.
NorthamEAndersonPAdlerR, et al. (1996). Psychosocial and family functioning in children with insulin-dependent diabetes at diagnosis and one year later. Journal of Pediatric Psychology21(5): 699–717.
19.
OlsonD (2011). FACES IV and the circumplex model: Validation study. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy37(1): 64–80.
20.
PaschouADamigosDSkapinakisP, et al. (2018) The relationship between burden and depression in spouses of chronic kidney disease patients. Depression Research and Treatment2018: 8.
21.
PritchettRKempJWilsonP, et al. (2011) Quick, simple measures of family relationships for use in clinical practice and research. A systematic review. Family Practice28(2): 172–187.
22.
PruchnoRWilson-GendersonMCartwrightFP (2009) Depressive symptoms and marital satisfaction in the context of chronic disease: A longitudinal dyadic analysis. Journal of Family Psychology23(4): 573–584.
23.
PutnickDLBornsteinMH (2016) Measurement invariance conventions and reporting: The state of the art and future directions for psychological research. Developmental Review: DR41: 71–90.
24.
RoslandA-MHeislerMPietteJD (2012) The impact of family behaviors and communication patterns on chronic illness outcomes: A systematic review. Journal of Behavioral Medicine35(2): 221–239.
25.
SkinnerHSteinhauerPSitareniosG (2000) Family Assessment Measure (FAM) and process model of family functioning. Journal of Family Therapy22(2): 190–210.
26.
SmithSRSolidayE (2001). The effects of parental chronic kidney disease on the family. Family Relations50(2): 171–177. DOI:10.1111/j.1741-3729.2001.00171.x.
27.
StengelBCombeCJacquelinetC, et al. (2014) The French Chronic Kidney Disease-Renal Epidemiology and Information Network (CKD-REIN) cohort study. Nephrology, dialysis, transplantation: official publication of the European Dialysis and Transplant Association - European Renal Association29(8): 1500–1507.
28.
StengelBMetzgerMCombeC, et al. (2019) Risk profile, quality of life and care of patients with moderate and advanced CKD: The French CKD-REIN Cohort Study. Nephrology, Dialysis, Transplantation: Official Publication of the European Dialysis and Transplant Association - European Renal Association34(2): 277–286.
29.
SzinovaczME (1983) Using couple data as a methodological tool: The case of marital violence. Journal of Marriage and the Family45(3): 633–644.
30.
TuttyLM (1995) Theoretical and practical issues in selecting a measure of family functioning. Research on Social Work Practice5(1): 80–106.
31.
UntasARascleNCosnefroyO, et al. (2011a) Psychometric properties of the French adaptation of the Family Relationship Index (FRI). Encephale37(2): 110–118.
32.
UntasAThummaJRascleN, et al. (2011b) The associations of social support and other psychosocial factors with mortality and quality of life in the dialysis outcomes and practice patterns study. Clinical journal of the American Society of Nephrology: CJASN6(1): 142–152.
33.
Van De SchootRSchmidtPDe BeuckelaerA, et al. (2015) Editorial: Measurement invariance. Frontiers in Psychology6: 1–4.
34.
VandenbergRJLanceCE (2000) A review and synthesis of the measurement invariance literature: Suggestions, practices, and recommendations for organizational research. Organizational Research Methods3(1): 4–70.
35.
Wilson-GendersonMPruchnoRACartwrightFP (2009) Effects of caregiver burden and satisfaction on affect of older end-stage renal disease patients and their spouses. Psychology and Aging24(4): 955–967.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
