Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35394436›Full record

ArticleJMIR formative research2022

Prioritizing Support Offered to Caregivers by Examining the Status Quo and Opportunities for Enhancement When Using Web-Based Self-reported Health Questionnaires: Descriptive Qualitative Study.

Theresa Coles, Nicole Lucas, Erin Daniell, Caitlin Sullivan, Ke Wang, Jennifer M Olsen, Megan Shepherd-Banigan

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR formative research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

7 authors.

Theresa ColesDepartment of Population Health Sciences, Duke University, Durham, NC, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2941-8999
Nicole LucasDepartment of Population Health Sciences, Duke University, Durham, NC, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6326-4922
Erin DaniellDepartment of Population Health Sciences, Duke University, Durham, NC, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3252-8064
Caitlin SullivanDepartment of Population Health Sciences, Duke University, Durham, NC, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0793-6752
Ke WangRosalynn Carter Institute for Caregivers, Americus, GA, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1569-9507
Jennifer M OlsenRosalynn Carter Institute for Caregivers, Americus, GA, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6547-8791
Megan Shepherd-BaniganDepartment of Population Health Sciences, Duke University, Durham, NC, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4020-8936

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe Rosalynn Carter Institute for Caregivers (RCI) offers evidence-based interventions to promote caregivers' health and well-being. Trained coaches regularly meet with caregivers to offer education and instructions to improve caregiver health, build skill sets, and increase resilience. Two of these interventions, RCI Resources for Enhancing Alzheimer's Caregiver Health (REACH) and Operation Family Caregiver (OFC), use a set of caregiver-reported questionnaires to monitor caregivers' health status and needs.

objectiveThis study aims to describe how web-based assessment questionnaires are used to identify and monitor caregiver status in the RCI REACH and OFC programs and outlines perceived enhancements to the web-based system that could support caregiver-coach encounters by directing priorities.

methodsThis was a descriptive, qualitative study. Data were collected via semistructured interviews with caregivers and coaches in the RCI REACH and OFC programs from July 2020 to October 2020. During the interviews, participants were asked to describe how the assessment questionnaires were used to inform caregiver-coach encounters, perceived usefulness of enhancements to web-based display, and preference for the structure of score results. The interviews were recorded, transcribed, and coded using structural and interpretive codes from a structured codebook. Qualitative content analysis was used to identify themes and summarize the results.

resultsA total of 25 caregivers (RCI REACH: 13/25, 52%; OFC: 12/25, 48%) and 11 coaches (RCI REACH: 5/11, 45%; OFC: 6/11, 55%) were interviewed. Most caregivers indicated that the assessment questions were relevant to their caregiving experience. Some caregivers and coaches indicated that they thought the assessment should be administered multiple times throughout the program to evaluate the caregiver progress. Overall, caregivers did not want their scores to be compared with those of other caregivers, and there was heterogeneity in how caregivers preferred to view their results at the question or topic level. Coaches were uncertain as to which and how much of the results from the self-reported questionnaires should be shared with caregivers. Overall, the results were very similar, regardless of program affiliation (RCI REACH vs OFC).

conclusionsWeb-based and procedural enhancements were identified to enrich caregiver-coach encounters. New and enhanced strategies for using web-based assessment questionnaires to direct priorities in the caregiver-coach encounters included integrating figures showing caregiver progress at the individual caregiver level, ability to toggle results through different figures focused on individual versus aggregate results, and support for interpreting scores. The results of this qualitative study will drive the next steps for RCI's web-based platform and expand on current standards for administering self-reported questionnaires in clinical practice settings.

Indexed as

caregivercaregiver outcomesintervention technologypatient-reported outcome measuresself-report questionnairesweb-based questionnaires

Identifiers

PMID35394436
PMCPMC9034415

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.