Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34792783›Full record

ArticleNeurology and therapy2022

Caregiver Involvement in MS: Duty or Disruption?

Jürg Kesselring, Alexey Boyko, Alice Laroni, Trishna Bharadia, Pieter van Galen, Nektaria Alexandri

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Neurology and therapy, 2022. 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
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 23% 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  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

6 authors at 4 institutions in 4 countries.

Jürg KesselringDepartment of Neurology and Neurorehabilitation, Kliniken Valens, Valens, Switzerland. Juerg.Kesselring@kliniken-valens.ch.
Alexey BoykoInstitute of Clinical Neurology and Department of Neuroimmunology of the Federal Centre of Brain Research and Neurotechnologies, Pirogov's Russian National Research Scientific Medical University, Moscow, Russia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2975-4151
Alice LaroniDepartment of Neuroscience, Rehabilitation, Ophthalmology, Genetics, Maternal and Child Health, University of Genoa, Genoa, Italy.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5599-9788
Trishna BharadiaPatient Author, Member of the MS in the 21st Century Steering Group, Buckinghamshire, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3633-729X
Pieter van GalenPatient Author, Member of the MS in the 21st Century Steering Group, Overijse, Belgium.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7074-2550
Nektaria AlexandriMerck KGaA, Darmstadt, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9806-8358
Merck (Germany) · DEOspedale Policlinico San Martino · ITPirogov Russian National Research Medical University · RUValens Clinics · CH

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Multiple sclerosis (MS) is a complex condition with numerous physical, cognitive and emotional symptoms. These may necessitate significant, permanent lifestyle changes for people with multiple sclerosis (PwMS) and their caregivers and families, meaning it is important in contemporary neurological practice to consider including families and/or caregivers in the management of MS. However, existing evidence suggests that family involvement is not always beneficial; for example, it can exert either a strong positive or negative influence on the ability of PwMS to achieve optimal outcomes from their treatment and disease management. This paper, based on a live debate between neurologists and PwMS, examines the current perceptions on constructive involvement of families and caregivers in consultations for and management of MS, and reveals several areas where additional studies are warranted. Shared decision-making in MS has historically been a collaboration solely between healthcare professionals (HCPs) and PwMS, but PwMS are now more frequently being accompanied to appointments by a support person. This paper encourages HCPs to understand the dynamics between PwMS and their support person, and to individualize consultations and information accordingly. Family and caregiver involvement in the provision of care for PwMS needs to be for the benefit of, and at the discretion of, the PwMS. Support for families of PwMS, although important, may be more effectively and appropriately delivered through other channels outside of the clinical setting. Educating HCPs on the current patient experience to enable them to provide improved personalized care will ensure a mutualistic, patient-centred relationship with PwMS, which will help to optimize outcomes. Communication tools may also facilitate these interactions.

Indexed as

AdherenceCare satisfactionCommunicationConsultation styleMultiple sclerosisQuality of lifeRelationshipsShared care, caregiver

Identifiers

PMID34792783
PMCPMC8857341
OpenAlexW3213072784

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.