Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27562805›Full record

ArticleHealth economics review2016

Financial burden and quality of life of informal caregivers of patients with wet age-related macular degeneration.

Hannah Weyer-Wendl, Peter Walter

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Health economics review, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Patient-Perceived Benefit of Treatment in Polypoidal Choroidal Vasculopathy: A Pilot Study.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2020
    Article
  6. Article
  7. 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

2 authors.

Hannah Weyer-WendlDepartment of Ophthalmology, RWTH Aachen University, Pauwelsstr. 30, 52074, Aachen, Germany. weyer.wendl@gmail.com.
Peter WalterDepartment of Ophthalmology, RWTH Aachen University, Pauwelsstr. 30, 52074, Aachen, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe purpose of this research is to quantify the cost burden, care times and the impact on the quality of life (QoL) of informal caring relatives caring for patients with wet age-related macular degeneration (wet AMD). Moreover we investigated the impact of care times on the QoL.

methodsThrough a specifically designed questionnaire, 150 caring relatives were interviewed retrospectively on all accrued financial costs, caring times incurred and the current QoL, assessed by a Visual Analogue Scale for happiness (VAS).

resultsThe caring time incurred was on average 6.4 ± 8.5 (mean +/- SD) hours per week. The QoL was on average rated at 6.7 ± 1.9 on a ten point scale. Financial strain was incurred by the direct non-medical costs of on average € 405 ± 1104 and the direct medical costs of on average € 134 ± 340 per year. Indirect costs were stated by two caregivers as amounting to € 2400 and € 6000 net income loss per year respectively. Caregivers of privately insured patients with wet AMD carried a financial cost burden which was up to six times higher than caregivers of patients who were on state insurance while showing the same visual acuity.

conclusionThe evaluation shows that caregivers of privately insured patients with wet AMD have higher costs than caregivers of patients with state insurance coverage. This burden seems to be a factor to be considered independently since it does not appear to have any relation to patients AMD acuity.

Indexed as

Age-related macular degenerationCaregiversCostsQuality of life

Identifiers

PMID27562805
PMCPMC4999382

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.