Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33416043›Full record

ArticleEpidemiology and psychiatric sciences2021

Mental health and caregiving experiences of family carers supporting people with psychosis.

J Sin, J Elkes, R Batchelor, C Henderson, S Gillard, L A Woodham, T Chen, A Aden, V Cornelius

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Epidemiology and psychiatric sciences, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 32 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
32citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
4.7field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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

32 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 49 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Co-Production With Mental Health Family Carers: The Value, Outcomes and Benefits for Family Carers and Academic Researchers.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2026
    Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Caregivers' Experience of Supporting Deaf Adults with Mental Health Disorders in Ghana.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2025
    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

9 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

J SinSchool of Health Sciences, City, University of London, Myddelton Street Building, 1 Myddelton Street, LondonEC1R 1UW, England, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0590-7165
J ElkesImperial Clinical Trials Unit, School of Public Health, Imperial College London, Stadium House, 68 Wood Lane, LondonW12 7RH, England, UK.
R BatchelorPopulation Health Research Institute, St George's, University of London, Cranmer Terrace, LondonSW17 0RE, England, UK.
C HendersonHealth Service & Population Research Department, King's College London, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology & Neuroscience, De Crespigny Park, LondonSE5 8AF, England, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6998-5659
S GillardSchool of Health Sciences, City, University of London, Myddelton Street Building, 1 Myddelton Street, LondonEC1R 1UW, England, UK.
L A WoodhamCentre for Technology in Education, St George's, University of London, Cranmer Terrace, LondonSW17 0RE, England, UK.
T ChenDepartment of Clinical Sciences, Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine, Pembroke Place, LiverpoolL3 5QA, England, UK.
A AdenImperial Clinical Trials Unit, School of Public Health, Imperial College London, Stadium House, 68 Wood Lane, LondonW12 7RH, England, UK.
V CorneliusImperial Clinical Trials Unit, School of Public Health, Imperial College London, Stadium House, 68 Wood Lane, LondonW12 7RH, England, UK.
Imperial College London · GBCity, University of London · GBSt George's, University of London · GBKing's College London · GBLiverpool School of Tropical Medicine · GB

Funding

Department of Health PDF-2015-08-035
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimsFamily carers supporting an individual with psychosis often experience poorer mental health, however, little is known about specific risk factors among these carers. We investigated the associations between demographic, caregiving characteristics and mental health outcomes in family carers supporting an individual with psychosis and compared carers' outcomes with general population norms.

methodsWe analysed baseline data from the COPe-support randomised controlled trial of online psychoeducation and peer support for adult carers supporting an individual with psychosis between 2018 and 2020. We collected carers' demographic and health outcome data, including wellbeing using Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Wellbeing Scale (WEMWBS as primary outcome), quality of life using EQ-5D-5L and caregiving experience assessed with Experience of Caregiving Inventory. We tested associations between carers' demographic and caregiving characteristics for each outcome in turn and meta-analysed carers' WEMWBS and EQ-5D-5L with Health Survey England (HSE) general population data from 2016 and 2017, respectively.

resultsThe 407 carers of people with psychosis had a mean WEMWBS score of 42.2 (s.d. 9.21) and their overall weighted pooled WEMWBS score was 7.3 (95% confidence interval (CI) -8.6 to -6.0, p < 0.01) lower than the HSE general population sample, indicating carers have poorer mental wellbeing by more than double the minimum clinically important difference of 3 points on WEMWBS. Among all caring relationships, partners had poorer wellbeing compared to parents with lower WEMWBS score (-6.8, -16.9 to 3.3, p = 0.03). Single carers had significantly poorer wellbeing (-3.6, -5.6 to -1.5, p < 0.01) and a more negative caregiving experience than those who were cohabiting. Spending more than 35 h per week caregiving increased carers' negative experience significantly (p = 0.01).

conclusionCarers of people with psychosis have poorer mental health than non-carers. Partners, lone carers and those spending more than 35 h per week on caring were found to be most at risk of poor mental health. Based on the results, we advocate that the details of carers for individuals with psychosis should be added to the existing carers or severe mental illness registers at all general practitioner surgeries and for their wellbeing screened routinely. Future large-scale prospective studies are needed to develop a predictive model to determine risk factors, hence to aid early identification of carers' support needs. Such understandings are also useful to inform tailored intervention development.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overCaregiversFamilyFemaleHumansMaleMental HealthMiddle AgedPsychotic DisordersQuality of LifeYoung AdultCaregivingfamily carerspsychosispublic mental healthquality of lifewellbeing

Identifiers

PMID33416043
PMCPMC7116786
OpenAlexW3115744493

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.