Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28360239›Full record

SynthesisBMJ open2017

Instruments measuring the disease-specific quality of life of family carers of people with neurodegenerative diseases: a systematic review.

Thomas E Page, Nicolas Farina, Anna Brown, Stephanie Daley, Ann Bowling, Thurstine Basset, Gill Livingston, Martin Knapp, Joanna Murray, Sube Banerjee

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMJ open, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Living well while providing support: validation of LTCQ-Carer for assessing informal carers' quality of life.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2023
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Measuring the quality of life of family carers of people with dementia: development and validation of C-DEMQOL.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2019
    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

10 authors.

Thomas E PageSchool of Psychology, University of Kent, Canterbury, UK.
Nicolas FarinaCentre for Dementia Studies, Brighton and Sussex Medical School, Brighton, UK.
Anna BrownSchool of Psychology, University of Kent, Canterbury, UK.
Stephanie DaleyCentre for Dementia Studies, Brighton and Sussex Medical School, Brighton, UK.
Ann BowlingDepartment of Health Sciences, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK.
Thurstine BassetDepartment of Lived Experience Advisory Panel, Sussex Partnership NHS Foundation Trust, Hove, UK.
Gill LivingstonDivision of Psychiatry, University College London, London, UK.
Martin KnappDepartment of Social Policy, London School of Economics, London, UK.
Joanna MurrayInstitute of Psychiatry, Psychology & Neuroscience, King's College London, London, UK.
Sube BanerjeeCentre for Dementia Studies, Brighton and Sussex Medical School, Brighton, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveNeurodegenerative diseases, such as dementia, have a profound impact on those with the conditions and their family carers. Consequently, the accurate measurement of family carers' quality of life (QOL) is important. Generic measures may miss key elements of the impact of these conditions, so using disease-specific instruments has been advocated. This systematic review aimed to identify and examine the psychometric properties of disease-specific outcome measures of QOL of family carers of people with neurodegenerative diseases (Alzheimer's disease and other dementias; Huntington's disease; Parkinson's disease; multiple sclerosis; and motor neuron disease).

designSystematic review.

methodsInstruments were identified using 5 electronic databases (PubMed, PsycINFO, Web of Science, Scopus and the International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS)) and lateral search techniques. Only studies which reported the development and/or validation of a disease-specific measure for adult family carers, and which were written in English, were eligible for inclusion. The methodological quality of the included studies was evaluated using the COnsensus based Standards for the selection of health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) checklist. The psychometric properties of each instrument were examined.

results676 articles were identified. Following screening and lateral searches, a total of 8 articles were included; these reported 7 disease-specific carer QOL measures. Limited evidence was available for the psychometric properties of the 7 instruments. Psychometric analyses were mainly focused on internal consistency, reliability and construct validity. None of the measures assessed either criterion validity or responsiveness to change.

conclusionsThere are very few measures of carer QOL that are specific to particular neurodegenerative diseases. The findings of this review emphasise the importance of developing and validating psychometrically robust disease-specific measures of carer QOL.

Indexed as

AgedCaregiversChecklistHealth Status IndicatorsHumansMaleMiddle AgedNeurodegenerative DiseasesPsychometricsQuality of LifeReproducibility of ResultsSurveys and QuestionnairescarersmeasurementNeurodegenerative diseasespsychometricsquality of life

Identifiers

PMID28360239
PMCPMC5372121

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.