Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26561236›Full record

SynthesisBMC geriatrics2015

The effectiveness of interventions in supporting self-management of informal caregivers of people with dementia; a systematic meta review.

Judith G Huis In Het Veld, Renate Verkaik, Patriek Mistiaen, Berno van Meijel, Anneke L Francke

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMC geriatrics, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 38 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
38citing papers in PubMed, 5 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

38 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Recommendations of the 5th Canadian Consensus Conference on the diagnosis and treatment of dementia.Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association · 2020
    Guideline
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Trial
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  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

5 authors.

Judith G Huis In Het VeldNetherlands Institute for Health Services Research (NIVEL), Utrecht, The Netherlands. j.huisinhetveld@vumc.nl.
Renate VerkaikNetherlands Institute for Health Services Research (NIVEL), Utrecht, The Netherlands. r.verkaik@nivel.nl.
Patriek MistiaenNetherlands Institute for Health Services Research (NIVEL), Utrecht, The Netherlands. patriek.mistiaen@kce.fgov.be.
Berno van MeijelDepartment of Psychiatry, EMGO Institute for Health and Care Research, VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. berno.vanmeijel@inholland.nl.
Anneke L FranckeNetherlands Institute for Health Services Research (NIVEL), Utrecht, The Netherlands. a.francke@vumc.nl.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundInformal caregivers of people with dementia are challenged in managing the consequences of dementia in daily life. The objective of this meta-review was to synthesize evidence from previous systematic reviews about professional self-management support interventions for this group.

methodsIn March 2014, searches were conducted in PubMed, CINAHL, Cochrane Library, Embase and PsycINFO. The PRISMA Statement was followed. Interventions were grouped using Martin's targets of self-management, covering 5 targets: relationship with family, maintaining an active lifestyle, psychological wellbeing, techniques to cope with memory changes and information about dementia. Using an evidence synthesis, the outcomes from the included interventions were synthesized and conclusions were drawn about the level of evidence for the effectiveness of interventions within each target.

resultsTen high-quality systematic reviews were selected. Evidence exists for the effectiveness of professional self-management support interventions targeting psychological wellbeing on stress and social outcomes of informal caregivers. In addition, evidence exists for the effectiveness of interventions targeting information on ability/knowledge. Limited evidence was found for the effectiveness of interventions targeting techniques to cope with memory change on coping skills and mood, and for interventions targeting information on the outcomes sense of competence and decision-making confidence of informal caregivers.

conclusionsScientific evidence exists for the effectiveness of a number of professional self-management support interventions targeting psychological wellbeing and information. Health care professionals could take account of the fact that psycho-education was integrated in most of the self-management support interventions that were found to be effective in this meta-review. Furthermore, longer and more intensive interventions were associated with greater effects.

Indexed as

Adaptation, PsychologicalBurnout, ProfessionalCompassion FatigueDementiaCaregiversConsumer Health InformationHumansSelf CareSocial Support

Identifiers

PMID26561236
PMCPMC4642777

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.