ArticlePloS one2019
Public responses to volunteer community care: Propositions for old age and end of life.
Article in PloS one, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Use and Acceptance of Smart Elderly Care Apps Among Chinese Medical Staff and Older Individuals: Web-Based Hybrid Survey Study.JMIR formative research · 2023Article
- Spiritual Care: Motivations and Experiences through the Lenses and Voices of a Cohort of Spiritual Care Workers at an Established Hospice in Cape Town, South Africa.Journal of religion and health · 2021Article
- Retention of volunteers and factors influencing program performance of the Senior Care Volunteers Training Program in Jiangsu, China.PloS one · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundFunding shortages and an ageing population have increased pressures on state or insurance funded end of life care for older people. Across the world, policy debate has arisen about the potential role volunteers can play, working alongside health and social care professionals in the community to support and care for the ageing and dying.
aimsThe authors examined self-reported levels of care for the elderly by the public in England, and public opinions of community volunteering concepts to care for the elderly at the end of life. In particular, claimed willingness to help and to be helped by local people was surveyed.
methodsA sample of 3,590 adults in England aged 45 or more from an online access panel responded to a questionnaire in late 2017. The survey data was weighted to be representative of the population within this age band. Key literature and formative qualitative research informed the design of the survey questionnaire, which was further refined after piloting.
resultsPreferences for different models of community volunteering were elicited. There was a preference for 'formal' models with increased wariness of 'informal' features. Whilst 32% of adults said they 'might join' depending on whom the group helped, unsurprisingly more personal and demanding types of help significantly reduced the claimed willingness to help. Finally, willingness to help (or be helped) by local community carers or volunteers was regarded as less attractive than care being provided by personal family, close friends or indeed health and care professionals.
conclusionFindings suggest that if community volunteering to care for elderly people at the end of life in England is to expand it may require considerable attention to the model including training for volunteers and protections for patients and volunteers as well as public education and promotion. Currently, in England, there is a clear preference for non-medical care to be delivered by close family or social care professionals, with volunteer community care regarded only as a back-up option.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.