Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26274910›Full record

SynthesisTelemedicine journal and e-health : the official journal of the American Telemedicine Association2016

The Impact of Technology-Based Interventions on Informal Caregivers of Stroke Survivors: A Systematic Review.

Abdulkarim Yousef Aldehaim, Faisal F Alotaibi, Constance R Uphold, Stuti Dang

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Telemedicine journal and e-health : the official journal of the American Telemedicine Association, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
28citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

28 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Supporting family care: a scoping app review.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2022
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Abdulkarim Yousef Aldehaim1 Department of Public Health, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine , Miami, Florida.
Faisal F Alotaibi1 Department of Public Health, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine , Miami, Florida.
Constance R Uphold4 Department of Aging, University of Florida , Gainesville, Florida.
Stuti Dang6 Geriatric Research, Education, and Clinical Center and Extended Care and Research Services, Bruce W. Carter Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Center , Miami, Florida.

Funding

University of Florida Older Americans Independence Center (OAIC)P30AG028740 · NIA · UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA · PI CHRISTIAAN LEEUWENBURGH · 2007 to 2026
$22.8M
NIA NIH HHS P30 AG028740
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThis article is a systematic review of the impact of technology-based intervention on outcomes related to care providers for those who survived a stroke. MATERIALS AND

methodsLiterature was identified in the PubMed, PsycINFO, Scopus, and Cochrane databases for evidence on technology-based interventions for stroke survivors' caregivers. The search was restricted for all English-language articles from 1970 to February 2015 that implied technology-based interventions. This review included studies that measured the impact of these types of approaches on one or more of the following: depression and any of the following-problem-solving ability, burden, health status, social support, preparedness, and healthcare utilization by care recipient-as secondary outcomes. Telephone or face-to-face counseling sessions were not of interest for this review. The search strategy yielded five studies that met inclusion criteria: two randomized clinical trials and three pilot/preliminary studies, with diverse approaches and designs.

resultsFour studies have assessed the primary outcome, two of which reported significant decreases in caregivers' depressive symptoms. Two studies had measured each of the following outcomes-burden, problem-solving ability, health status, and social support-and they revealed no significant differences following the intervention. Only one study assessed caregivers' preparedness and showed improved posttest scores. Healthcare services use by the care recipient was assessed by one study, and the results indicated significant reduction in emergency department visits and hospital re-admissions.

conclusionsDespite various study designs and small sample sizes, available data suggest that an intervention that incorporates a theoretical-based model and is designed to target caregivers as early as possible is a promising strategy. Furthermore, there is a need to incorporate a cost-benefit analysis in future studies.

Indexed as

Outcome Assessment, Health CareAgedAged, 80 and overCaregiversFemaleHumansMaleNursingPilot ProjectsProfessional-Patient RelationsPrognosisRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicRehabilitation NursingRisk AssessmentSeverity of Illness IndexStrokee-healthtelecommunicationstelehealthtelemedicineteleneurology

Identifiers

PMID26274910
PMCPMC5915262

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.