Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30616692›Full record

ArticleTrials2019

Organising Support for Carers of Stroke Survivors (OSCARSS): study protocol for a cluster randomised controlled trial, including health economic analysis.

Emma Patchwood, Katy Rothwell, Sarah Rhodes, Evridiki Batistatou, Kate Woodward-Nutt, Yiu-Shing Lau, Gunn Grande, Gail Ewing, Audrey Bowen

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract readClinical Trial Protocol
In one paragraph

Article in Trials, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05185271 (Adopting Dyad-focused Strategy Training to Stroke Survivors and Their Caregivers), which is not on this map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 24% 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.

NCT05185271 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2021, after this paper: background citation

Adopting Dyad-focused Strategy Training to Stroke Survivors and Their Caregivers: Intervention Development and a Feasibility Study

TypeinterventionalSponsorTaipei Medical UniversityRan2021 to 2023Enrolled16ConditionsStrokeArmsDyad-focused strategy training
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

9 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Emma PatchwoodNational Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Collaboration for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care Greater Manchester (CLAHRC GM), Salford Royal Foundation NHS Trust, Salford, UK. emma.patchwood@manchester.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4198-5761
Katy RothwellNational Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Collaboration for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care Greater Manchester (CLAHRC GM), Salford Royal Foundation NHS Trust, Salford, UK.
Sarah RhodesNational Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Collaboration for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care Greater Manchester (CLAHRC GM), Salford Royal Foundation NHS Trust, Salford, UK.
Evridiki BatistatouNational Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Collaboration for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care Greater Manchester (CLAHRC GM), Salford Royal Foundation NHS Trust, Salford, UK.
Kate Woodward-NuttNational Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Collaboration for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care Greater Manchester (CLAHRC GM), Salford Royal Foundation NHS Trust, Salford, UK.
Yiu-Shing LauCentre for Health Economics, Division of Population Health, Health Services Research & Primary Care, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.
Gunn GrandeNational Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Collaboration for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care Greater Manchester (CLAHRC GM), Salford Royal Foundation NHS Trust, Salford, UK.
Gail EwingCentre for Family Research, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.
Audrey BowenNational Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Collaboration for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care Greater Manchester (CLAHRC GM), Salford Royal Foundation NHS Trust, Salford, UK.
Manchester Academic Health Science Centre · GBSalford Royal NHS Foundation Trust · GBUniversity of Cambridge · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundStroke often results in chronic disability, with partners and family members taking on the role of informal caregiver. There is considerable uncertainty regarding how best to identify and address carers' needs. The Carer Support Needs Assessment Tool (CSNAT) is a carer-led approach to individualised assessment and support for caregiving that may be beneficial in palliative care contexts. CSNAT includes an implementation toolkit. Through collaboration, including with service users, we adapted CSNAT for stroke and for use in a UK stroke specialist organisation providing long-term support. The main aims of OSCARSS are to investigate the clinical and cost-effectiveness of CSNAT-Stroke relative to current practice. This paper focuses on the trial protocol, with the embedded process evaluation reported separately.

methodsLongitudinal, multi-site, pragmatic, cluster randomised controlled trial with a health economic analysis. Clusters are UK services randomised to CSNAT-Stroke intervention or usual care, stratified by size of service. Eligible carer participants are: adults aged > 18 years; able to communicate in English; referred to participating clusters; and seen face-to-face at least once by the provider, for support. The 'date seen' for initial support denotes the start of intervention (or control) and carers are referred to the research team after this for study recruitment. Primary outcome is caregiver strain (FACQ - Strain) at three months after 'date seen'. Secondary outcomes include: caregiver distress; positive caregiving appraisals (both FACQ subscales); Pound Carer Satisfaction with Services; mood (HADs); and health (EQ-5D5L) at three months. All outcomes are followed up at six months. Health economic analyses will use additional data on caregiver health service utilisation and informal care provision. DISCUSSION: OSCARSS is open to recruitment at the time of article submission. Study findings will allow us to evaluate the clinical and cost-effectiveness of the CSNAT-Stroke intervention, directed at improving outcomes for informal carers of stroke survivors. Trial findings will be interpreted in the context of our embedded process evaluation including qualitative interviews with those who received and provided services as well as data on treatment fidelity. OSCARSS will contribute to knowledge of the unmet needs of informal stroke caregivers and inform future stroke service development.

trial registrationISRCTN Registry, ISRCTN58414120 . Registered on 26 July 2016.

Indexed as

CaregiversAdultCost-Benefit AnalysisHumansMulticenter Studies as TopicNeeds AssessmentPragmatic Clinical Trials as TopicSample SizeStrokeSurvivorsCarersCluster randomised controlled trialComplex interventionHealth service; service user involvement; health economics; qualitative interviewsInformal caregiversStroke

Identifiers

PMID30616692
PMCPMC6323775
OpenAlexW2909746310

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

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.