Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29258980›Full record

Trial reportJournal of medical Internet research2017

Implementation of the Blended Care Self-Management Program for Caregivers of People With Early-Stage Dementia (Partner in Balance): Process Evaluation of a Randomized Controlled Trial.

Lizzy Mm Boots, Marjolein E de Vugt, Claudia Mj Smeets, Gertrudis Ijm Kempen, Frans Rj Verhey

Open access · goldAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Journal of medical Internet research, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 34 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
34citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
4.0field-weighted citation impact, top 6% of its field
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

34 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 73 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  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

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Lizzy Mm Boots *Department of Psychiatry and Neuropsychology, Alzheimer Center Limburg, School for Mental Health and Neurosciences, Maastricht University Medical Center+, Maastricht, Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-8309-4502
Marjolein E de Vugt *Department of Psychiatry and Neuropsychology, Alzheimer Center Limburg, School for Mental Health and Neurosciences, Maastricht University Medical Center+, Maastricht, Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-2113-4134
Claudia Mj Smeets *Department of Psychiatry and Neuropsychology, Alzheimer Center Limburg, School for Mental Health and Neurosciences, Maastricht University Medical Center+, Maastricht, Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0003-2601-274X
Gertrudis Ijm Kempen *Department of Health Services Research, Care and Public Health Research Institute, Maastricht University, Maastricht, Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-7053-2198
Frans Rj Verhey *Department of Psychiatry and Neuropsychology, Alzheimer Center Limburg, School for Mental Health and Neurosciences, Maastricht University Medical Center+, Maastricht, Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-8307-8406
Maastricht University · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCaring for a family member with dementia puts caregivers at risk of overburdening. Electronic health (eHealth) support for caregivers offers an opportunity for accessible tailored interventions. The blended care self-management program "Partner in Balance" (PiB) for early-stage dementia caregivers was executed in Dutch dementia care organizations. The program combines face-to-face coaching with tailored Web-based modules. Next to an evaluation of program effectiveness, an evaluation of sampling and intervention quality is essential for the generalizability and interpretation of results.

objectiveThe aim of this study was to describe the process evaluation from the perspective of both family caregivers (participants) and professionals delivering the intervention (coaches) to determine internal and external validity before the effect analysis and aid future implementation.

methodsImplementation, sampling, and intervention quality were evaluated with quantitative and qualitative data from logistical research data, coach questionnaires (n=13), and interviews with coaches (n=10) and participants (n=49). Goal attainment scaling was used to measure treatment-induced change. Analyses were performed with descriptive statistics and deductive content analysis.

resultsThe participation rate of eligible caregivers was 51.9% (80/154). Recruitment barriers were lack of computer and lack of need for support. Young age and employment were considered recruitment facilitators. All coaches attended training and supervision in blended care self-management. Deviations from the structured protocol were reported on intervention time, structure, and feedback. Coaches described an intensified relationship with the caregiver post intervention. Caregivers appreciated the tailored content and positive feedback. The blended structure increased their openness. The discussion forum was appreciated less. Overall, personal goals were attained after the program (T>50). Implementation barriers included lack of financing, time, and deviating target population.

conclusionsParticipants and coaches were satisfied with the intervention, but adapting the content to specific subgroups, for example, younger caregivers, was recommended. Implementation of the program requires more awareness of the benefits of blended care self-management programs and training in tailored self-management skills.

trial registrationDutch Trial Register (NTR): NTR4748; http://www.trialregister.nl (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/6vSb2t9Mg).

Indexed as

AgedCaregiversDementiaFemaleHumansSelf-ManagementSurveys and Questionnairescaregiversinternettechnologytherapeutics

Identifiers

PMID29258980
PMCPMC5750419
OpenAlexW2776629786

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.