Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34293002›Full record

SynthesisPloS one2021

Supporting communication of visit information to informal caregivers: A systematic review.

Reed W R Bratches, Paige N Scudder, Paul J Barr

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
1.9field-weighted citation impact, top 11% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Caregiver activation: a concept analysis.International journal of nursing studies advances · 2026
    Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Reed W R BratchesThe Dartmouth Institute for Health Policy and Clinical Practice, Geisel School of Medicine, Dartmouth College, Lebanon, New Hampshire, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0001-9446-7098
Paige N ScudderBiomedical Libraries, Dartmouth College, Hanover, New Hampshire, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0003-0513-3315
Paul J BarrThe Dartmouth Institute for Health Policy and Clinical Practice, Geisel School of Medicine, Dartmouth College, Lebanon, New Hampshire, United States of America.
Dartmouth College · US

Funding

Treatment Development & Evaluation CoreP30DA029926 · NIDA · DARTMOUTH COLLEGE · PI Lisa A. Marsch · 2011 to 2026
$21.5M
NIDA NIH HHS P30 DA029926
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

importanceWhen caregivers cannot attend the clinic visit for the person they provide care for, patients are the predominant source of clinic visit information; however, poor patient recall inhibits the quality of information shared, resulting in poor caregiver preparedness and contributing to caregiver morbidity. Technological solutions exist to sharing clinic visit information, but their effectiveness is unclear.

objectivesTo assess if and how technology is being used to connect informal caregivers to patient clinic visit information when they cannot otherwise attend, and its impact on caregiver and patient outcomes. EVIDENCE REVIEW: MEDLINE, Cochrane, Scopus, and CINAHL were searched through 5/3/2020 with no language restrictions or limits. ClinicalTrials.gov and other reference lists were included in the search. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and nonrandomized trials that involved using a technological medium e.g., video or the electronic health record, to communicate visit information to a non-attending caregiver were included. Data were collected and screened using a standardized data collection form. Cochrane's Risk of Bias 2.0 and the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale were used for RCTs and nonrandomized trials, respectively. All data were abstracted by two independent reviewers, with disagreements resolved by a third reviewer.

findingsOf 2115 studies identified in the search, four met criteria for inclusion. Two studies were randomized controlled trials and two were nonrandomized trials. All four studies found positive effects of their intervention on caregiver outcomes of interest, and three out of four studies found statistically significant improvements in key outcomes for caregivers receiving visit information. Improved outcomes included caregiver happiness, caregiver activation, caregiver preparedness, and caregiver confidence in managing patient health. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Our review suggests that using technology to give a caregiver access to clinical visit information could be beneficial to various caregiver outcomes. There is an urgent need to address the lack of research in this area.

Indexed as

CaregiversCommunicationQuality of LifeFamilyHumansRandomized Controlled Trials as Topic

Identifiers

PMID34293002
PMCPMC8297802
OpenAlexW3183221308

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.