Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29566167›Full record

SynthesisThe Gerontologist2019

Understanding and Measuring the Wellbeing of Carers of People With Dementia.

Nicola A Cunningham, Tom R Cunningham, Jane M Roberston

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Gerontologist, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. 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

3 authors.

Nicola A CunninghamFaculty of Health Sciences, University of Stirling, Stirling, Scotland, UK.
Tom R CunninghamStudent Services, University of Dundee, Dundee, Scotland, UK.
Jane M RoberstonFaculty of Social Sciences, University of Stirling, Stirling, Scotland, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND

objectivesTo determine how the wellbeing of carers of people with dementia is understood and measured in contemporary health research. RESEARCH DESIGN AND

methodsA systematic review of reviews was designed, registered with PROSPERO, and then conducted. This focused on systematic reviews of research literature published from 2010 onwards; with the wellbeing of carers of people with dementia being a primary focus. N = 19 studies met the inclusion criteria. Quality appraisal was conducted using the AMSTAR tool (2015). A narrative synthesis was conducted to explore how wellbeing is currently being understood and measured.

resultsContemporary health research most frequently conceptualizes wellbeing in the context of a loss-deficit model. Current healthcare research has not kept pace with wider discussions surrounding wellbeing which have become both more complex and more sophisticated. Relying on the loss-deficit model limits current research in understanding and measuring the lived experience of carers of people with dementia. There remains need for a clear and consistent measurement of wellbeing. DISCUSSION AND IMPLICATIONS: Without clear consensus, health professionals must be careful when using the term "wellbeing". To help inform healthcare policy and practice, we offer a starting point for a richer concept of wellbeing in the context of dementia that is multi-faceted to include positive dimensions of caregiving in addition to recognized aspects of burden. Standardized and robust measurements are needed to enhance research and there may be benefit from developing a more mixed, blended approach to measurement.

Indexed as

Quality of LifeCaregiversDementiaHumansSystematic Reviews as TopicTerminology as TopicEnriching caringSocial gerontologyWellbeing

Identifiers

PMID29566167
PMCPMC6857741

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.