Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34233972›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2021

Motivations and willingness to provide care from a geographical distance, and the impact of distance care on caregivers' mental and physical health: a mixed-method systematic review protocol.

Eva Bei, Mikołaj Zarzycki, Val Morrison, Noa Vilchinsky

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Stakeholder Consultation to Establish Research Priorities for Specialist Dementia Nursing in the United Kingdom.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2024
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  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

4 authors.

Eva BeiDepartment of Psychology, Bar-Ilan University, Ramat Gan, Israel eva.bei@biu.ac.il.ORCID 0000-0002-3093-0829
Mikołaj ZarzyckiSchool of Psychology, Bangor University, Bangor, UK.
Val MorrisonSchool of Psychology, Bangor University, Bangor, UK.
Noa VilchinskyDepartment of Psychology, Bar-Ilan University, Ramat Gan, Israel.ORCID 0000-0003-4965-4745

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionDistance caregivers (DCGs) are a growing population with substantial contribution to informal care. While a reasonable amount is known on the determinants of motives and willingness to provide local informal care, and the local caregiver outcomes, reports for the distance caregiving population are lacking. An evidence synthesis of what motivates and makes DCGs willing to care from a distance and the impact of that care on their mental and physical health would highlight any gaps or consensus in knowledge. This would guide the research needed towards the development of tailored interventions, in order to support DCGs and promote the sustainability of distance care. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This protocol adheres to Preferred Items for Reporting of Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Protocols guidelines and the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) Methodology for mixed-method reviews. A comprehensive search strategy will be conducted in four electronic databases (CINAHL, MEDLINE, PubMed and PsycINFO). Grey literature will also be assessed to minimise publication bias. Two independent reviewers will assess each study for inclusion and any discrepancies will be resolved with the consultation of a third reviewer. Eligible studies for inclusion will be English language studies exploring the motives and willingness to care for a care recipient with a chronic disease, disability or frailty from a geographical distance; or studies focusing on the mental and physical health outcomes of DCGs. Qualitative and quantitative data will be integrated in a single qualitative synthesis following the JBI convergent integrated approach. Study quality will be assessed using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool version 2018. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval is not required for this study as no primary data will be collected. Findings will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publication and presentations at academic conferences and lay summaries for various stakeholders. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42020156350.

Indexed as

CaregiversMotivationHealth ServicesHumansResearch DesignSystematic Reviews as Topicanxiety disordersdepression & mood disordersmental healthprimary care

Identifiers

PMID34233972
PMCPMC8264892

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.