Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30185402›Full record

ReviewJMIR mental health2018

Digital Technology for Caregivers of People With Psychosis: Systematic Review.

Juliana Onwumere, Filipa Amaral, Lucia R Valmaggia

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in JMIR mental health, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.2field-weighted citation impact, top 13% 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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 28 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Operationalising a Recovery-Oriented Support and Information Programme Online: The EOLAS Programme.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023
    Article
  8. Supporting family care: a scoping app review.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2022
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. 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 at 1 institution in 1 country.

Juliana OnwumereInstitute of Psychology, Psychiatry and Neuroscience, Department of Psychology, King's College, London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7119-7451
Filipa AmaralInstitute of Psychology, Psychiatry and Neuroscience, Department of Psychology, King's College, London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4586-7340
Lucia R ValmaggiaInstitute of Psychology, Psychiatry and Neuroscience, Department of Psychology, King's College, London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6099-8464
King's College London · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPsychotic disorders are severe mental health conditions that adversely affect the quality of life and life expectancy. Schizophrenia, the most common and severe form of psychosis affects 21 million people globally. Informal caregivers (families) are known to play an important role in facilitating patient recovery outcomes, although their own health and well-being could be adversely affected by the illness. The application of novel digital interventions in mental health care for patient groups is rapidly expanding; interestingly, however, far less is known about their role with family caregivers.

objectiveThis study aimed to systematically identify the application of digital interventions that focus on informal caregivers of people with psychosis and describe their outcomes.

methodsWe completed a search for relevant papers in four electronic databases (EMBASE, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, and Web of Science). The search also included the Cochrane database and manual search of reference lists of relevant papers. The search was undertaken in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses reporting guidelines.

resultsThe search identified 9 studies derived from 8 unique datasets. Most studies were assessments of feasibility and were undertaken in the United States. Interventions were predominately Web-based, with a focus on improving the caregivers' knowledge and understanding about psychosis.

conclusionsThis study offers preliminary support for the feasibility and acceptability of digital interventions for psychosis in informal caregiver populations. However, the findings underpin a clear need for greater development in the range of caregiver-focused digital approaches on offer and robust evaluation of their outcomes. The use of digital approaches with caregiver populations seemingly lags someway behind the significant developments observed in patient groups.

Indexed as

carersdigital interventionsfamiliespsychosistechnology

Identifiers

PMID30185402
PMCPMC6231782
OpenAlexW2804905174

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.