Family functioning: Smilkstein’s family APGAR redesign
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.32385/rpmgf.v41i6.13976Keywords:
Family APGAR, Family dynamics, Family functionality, EvaluationAbstract
Introduction: The assessment of family functionality is inherent to the practice of general and family medicine.
Objectives: To review the Family APGAR, creating and testing an alternative scale assessing its sensitivity in detecting family functionality.
Methods: Quali-quantitative study, initial interviews to understand limitations and topics not covered in the Family APGAR. Development of a new scale, GDCCSP, considering comprehension difficulties, pleasantness, application time, and readability. Convergent validation with the Family APGAR and a self-assessment scale for family functionality through factor analysis, correlational study, and analysis with contextual variables.
Results: A n=53 people were interviewed (n=15 over 65 years old), 54.7% females. For 43.2% difficulties in understanding and responding, and for 38.0% the report of family problems not addressed by Smilkstein's APGAR, such as financial management, dedication, communication, crisis, health, and participation, were found. The APGAR/GDCCSP correlation in 55 people, 55.6% women, was found as r=0.643, p<0.001. The factor analysis of GDCCSP found two components explaining 52.72% of the variance in the responses, a reliability of 0.712 (Cronbach’s alpha), and the correlation with family functionality was r=0.574, p<0.001. The Family APGAR had an internal consistency of 0.706 (Cronbach’s alpha) and a correlation with the assessment of family functionality of r=0.432, p<0.001. The GDCCSP total did not vary significantly by sex, age, or socio-economic index.
Discussion: Reflection on the assessment of family functionality should be regular to accommodate social evolutionary variations.
Conclusion: It was possible to create and validate the GDCCSP scale to assess family functionality.
Downloads
References
1. Carter B, McGoldrick M. The changing family life cycle: a framework for family therapy. 2nd ed. Gardner Press; 1988. ISBN 9780898761375
2. Santí PM. La familia funcional y disfuncional, um indicador de salud. Rev Cubana Med Gen Integr. 1997;13(6):591-7.
3. Andrade A, Martins R. Funcionalidade familiar e qualidade de vida dos idosos. Millenium J Educ Technol Health. 2011;40(16):185-99.
4. Lewandowska-Walter A, Trawicka A, Bogdanowicz M, Sabiniewicz R, Woźniak-Mielczarek L. Families of people with Marfan syndrome: the relationship between the functioning of the family system and the life quality of the affected persons. Psychiatr Pol. 2021;55(4):815-34. English, Polish
5. Wang L, Fan XW, Zhao XD, Zhu BG, Qin HY. Correlation analysis of the quality of family functioning and subjective quality of life in rehabilitation patients living with schizophrenia in the community. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020;17(7):2481.
6. Ribé JM, Salamero M, Pérez-Testor C, Mercadal J, Aguilera C, Cleris M. Quality of life in family caregivers of schizophrenia patients in Spain: caregiver characteristics, caregiving burden, family functioning, and social and professional support. Int J Psychiatry Clin Pract. 2018;22(1):25-33.
7. Rodríguez-Sánchez E, Pérez-Peñaranda A, Losada-Baltar A, Pérez-Arechaederra D, Gómez-Marcos MÁ, Patino-Alonso MC, et al. Relationships between quality of life and family function in caregiver. BMC Fam Pract. 2011;12:19.
8. Wagner ME, Schubert HJ, Schubert DS. Family size effects: a review. J Genet Psychol. 1985;146(1):65-78.
9. Ferrer RL, Palmer R, Burge S. The family contribution to health status: a population-level estimate. Ann Fam Med. 2005;3(2):102-8.
10. Ramaswami SB, Jensen T, Berghaus M, De-Oliveira S, Russ SA, Weiss-Laxer N, et al. Family health development in life course research: a scoping review of family functioning measures. Pediatrics. 2022;149(Suppl 5):e2021053509J.
11. Smilkstein G. The family APGAR: a proposal for a family function test and its use by physicians. J Fam Pract. 1978;6(6):1231-9.
12. Newson L, Postmes T, Lea SE, Webley P. Why are modern families small? Toward an evolutionary and cultural explanation for the demographic transition. Pers Soc Psychol Rev. 2005;9(4):360-75.
13. Ferreira PM. Tendências de mudança no casamento em Portugal: uma sociografia dos últimos vinte anos [Internet]. In: VIII Congresso Luso-Afro-Brasileiro de Ciências Sociais, Coimbra, 16 a 18 de setembro de 2004. Available from: https://dialnet.unirioja.es/servlet/articulo?codigo=4643959
14. Liefbroer AC, Poortman AR, Seltzer JA. Why do intimate partners live apart? Evidence on LAT relationships across Europe. Demogr Res. 2015;32:251-86.
15. Ribeiro C. Família, saúde e doença: o que diz a investigação [Family, health and disease: what the research says]. Rev Port Clin Geral. 2007;23(3):299-306. Portuguese
16. Caniço H, Bairrada P, Rodríguez E, Carvalho A. Novos tipos de família: plano de cuidados. Coimbra: Imprensa da Universidade de Coimbra; 2010.
17. Shortridge-Baggett L, Malmgreen C, Wantroba A. Structured evaluation method for family assessment tools: evaluation of the family APGAR. Fam Saúde Desenv. 2004;6(2):91-9.
18. Gardner W, Nutting PA, Kelleher KJ, Werner JJ, Farley T, Stewart L, et al. Does the family APGAR effectively measure family functioning? J Fam Pract. 2001;50(1):19-25.
19. Yaphe J. Is the Family APGAR dead? A reappraisal of family assessment tools in Portugal. Rev Port Med Geral Fam. 2013;29(1):14-5.
20. Ribeiro AI, Launay L, Guillaume E, Launoy G, Barros H. The Portuguese version of the European Deprivation Index: development and association with all-cause mortality. PLoS One. 2018;13(12):e0208320.
21. Mayorga-Muñoz C, Gallardo-Peralta L, Galvez-Nieto JL. Propiedades psicométricas de la escala APGAR-familiar en personas mayores residentes en zonas rurales multiétnicas chilenas [Psychometric properties of APGAR-family scale in a multiethnic sample of Chilean older people]. Rev Med Chil. 2019;147(10):1283-90. Spanish
22. Good MJ, Smilkstein G, Good BJ, Shaffer T, Arons T. The Family APGAR Index: a study of construct validity. J Fam Pract. 1979;8(3):577-82.
23. Rebelo L. Família e cuidados de saúde [Family and health care]. Rev Port Clin Geral. 2007;23(3):295-7. Portuguese
24. Smilkstein G, Ashworth C, Montano D. Validity and reliability of the family APGAR as a test of family function. J Fam Pract. 1982;15(2):303-11.
25. Botero-Carvajal A, Jiménez Urrego ÁM, Gutierrez-Posso AG, Calero-Flórez M, Hernandez-Carrillo M. Factors associated with family function in school children: case-control study. Heliyon. 2023;9(3):e14595.
26. Ciaunica A, McEllin L, Kiverstein J, Gallese V, Hohwy J, Woźniak M. Zoomed out: digital media use and depersonalization experiences during the COVID-19 lockdown. Sci Rep. 2022;12(1):3888.
27. Favotto L, Michaelson V, Pickett W, Davison C. The role of family and computer-mediated communication in adolescent loneliness. PLoS One. 2019;14(6):e0214617.
28. Adair JG. The Hawthorne effect: a reconsideration of the methodological artifact. J Appl Psychol. 1984;69(2):334-45.
29. Santiago LM, Prazeres F, Boto T, Maurício K, Rosendo I, Simões JA. Multimorbidity daily life activities and socio-economic classification in the Central Portugal primary health care setting: an observational study. Fam Med Prim Care Rev. 2020;22(1):54-8.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Portuguese Journal of Family Medicine and General Practice
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
The authors will assign to the RPMGF the sole right to publish and distribute the content of the manuscript specified in this declaration via physical, electronic, broadcasting or any other medium that may come into existence. They also grant the RPMGF the right to use and exploit this manuscript, in particular by assigning, selling or licensing its content. This permission is permanent and takes effect from the moment the manuscript is submitted, has the maximum duration allowed by applicable Portuguese or international law and is of worldwide scope. The authors further declare that this assignment is made free of charge. If the RPMGF informs the authors that it is not going to publish their manuscript, the exclusive assignment of rights ceases forthwith.
The authors authorise the RPMGF (or any entity it may appoint) to act on their behalf when it believes that copyright may have been infringed.
