ReviewInternational journal of cardiology. Cardiovascular risk and prevention2023
A systematic review comparing cardiovascular disease among informal carers and non-carers.
Review in International journal of cardiology. Cardiovascular risk and prevention, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Care Partner Perspectives on Hypertension Management in Alzheimer Disease and Related Dementias in an Online Forum: Qualitative Thematic Analysis.JMIR nursing · 2026Article
- Contribution of informal caregivers in the self-care of patients with coronary artery disease: a descriptive cross-sectional study.BMC nursing · 2026Article
- Parental cancer caregiving in emerging and young adulthood: the impact of sibling dynamics on the caregiving experience.Journal of health psychology · 2026Article
- Article
- Gender predictors of adverse health.Journal of health psychology · 2026Article
- Cardiovascular disease risk among Australian unpaid carers - A survival analysis using 15 waves of the HILDA survey.PloS one · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Exposure to chronic stress increases the risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD). Providing informal care is known to be a stressful activity, but it is not clear whether informal caregiving is associated with CVD risk. This systematic review aimed to summarise and assess the quantitative evidence examining the association between providing informal care to others and CVD incidence in comparison with non-carers. Eligible articles were detected by searching six electronic literature databases (CINAHL, Embase, Global Health, OVID Medline, Scopus, and Web of Science). Two reviewers appraised 1887 abstracts and 34 full-text articles against a set of a priori eligibility criteria to identify articles for inclusion. Quality assessment of included studies was performed using the ROBINS-E risk of bias tool. Nine studies were identified that quantitatively assessed the association between providing informal care and CVD incidence in comparison to not providing informal care. Overall, there was no difference in the incidence of CVD between carers and non-carers across these studies. However, within the subgroup of studies that examined care provision intensity (hours/week) higher CVD incidence was observed for the most intense caregiving group compared to non-carers. One study examined only CVD-related mortality outcomes, observing a reduction in mortality for carers compared to non-carers. More research is required to explore the relationship between informal care and CVD incidence.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.