Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31640576›Full record

ArticleBMC geriatrics2019

Peer-to-peer support model to improve quality of life among highly vulnerable, low-income older adults in Cape Town, South Africa.

Leon N Geffen, Gabrielle Kelly, John N Morris, Elizabeth P Howard

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC geriatrics, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
6.1field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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

25 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 66 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Social factors of health-related quality of life in older adults: a multivariable analysis.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2023
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  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

4 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Leon N GeffenSamson Institute for Ageing Research, 234 Upper Buitenkant Street, Cape Town, 8001, South Africa.
Gabrielle KellySamson Institute for Ageing Research, 234 Upper Buitenkant Street, Cape Town, 8001, South Africa. gkelly@sifar.org.za.ORCID 0000-0001-9240-3955
John N MorrisMarcus Institute for Aging Research, Boston, MA, USA.
Elizabeth P HowardConnell School of Nursing, Boston College, Newton, MA, USA.
Samson Institute For Ageing Research · ZABoston College · USMarcus (United States) · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDeveloping countries are experiencing rapid population ageing. Many do not have the resources or formal structures available to support the health and wellbeing of people as they age. In other contexts, the use of peer support programmes have shown favourable outcomes in terms of reducing loneliness, increasing physical activity and managing chronic disease. Such programmes have not been previously developed or tested in African countries. We piloted a peer-to-peer support model among vulnerable community-dwelling adults in a developing country (South Africa) to examine the program's effect on wellbeing and social engagement.

methodsA pre-post, pilot design was used to evaluate targeted outcomes, including wellbeing, social support, social interaction, mood, loneliness and physical activity. A total of 212 persons, aged 60+ years and living independently in a low-income area in Cape Town were recruited and screened for eligibility by trained assessors. Participants were assessed using the interRAI CheckUp, WHO-5 Wellbeing index, and the MOS-SS 8 instruments before and after the 5-month intervention, during which they received regular visits and phone calls from trained peer volunteers. During visits volunteers administered a wellness screening, made referrals to health and social services; built friendships with clients; encouraged social engagement; promoted healthy living; and provided emotional and informational support.

resultsVolunteer visits with clients significantly increased levels of self-reported wellbeing by 58%; improved emotional and informational support by 50%; decreased reports of reduced social interaction by 91%; reduced loneliness by 70%; improved mood scores represented as anxiety, depression, lack of interest or pleasure in activities, and withdrawal from activities of interest; and increased levels of physical activity from 49 to 66%. DISCUSSION: The intervention led to demonstrable improvement in client wellbeing. Policymakers should consider integrating peer-support models into existing health programs to better address the needs of the elderly population and promote healthy ageing in resource-poor community settings. Longer-term and more rigorous studies with a control group are needed to support these findings and to investigate the potential impact of such interventions on health outcomes longitudinally.

Indexed as

Peer GroupSocial SupportAgedAged, 80 and overCounselingExerciseFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHealthy AgingHumansLonelinessMalePovertyQuality of LifeSelf ReportSouth AfricaHome visitorsinterRAI check-upPeer-to-peer support model

Identifiers

PMID31640576
PMCPMC6805367
OpenAlexW2981943352

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.