Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38553679›Full record

ReviewBMC geriatrics2024

What works to support carers of older people and older carers? an international evidence map of interventions and outcomes.

Gemma Spiers, Michelle M C Tan, Jayne L Astbury, Alex Hall, Nisar Ahmed, Kate Lanyi, Oleta Williams, Fiona Beyer, Dawn Craig, Barbara Hanratty

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in BMC geriatrics, 2024. 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
3.2field-weighted citation impact, top 8% 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, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  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

10 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Gemma SpiersPopulation Health Sciences Institute, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK. gemma-frances.spiers@newcastle.ac.uk.
Michelle M C TanPopulation Health Sciences Institute, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.
Jayne L AstburySchool of Health Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.
Alex HallSchool of Health Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.
Nisar AhmedSchool of Health Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.
Kate LanyiPopulation Health Sciences Institute, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.
Oleta WilliamsPopulation Health Sciences Institute, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.
Fiona BeyerPopulation Health Sciences Institute, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.
Dawn CraigPopulation Health Sciences Institute, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.
Barbara HanrattyPopulation Health Sciences Institute, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.
Newcastle University · GBUniversity of Manchester · GBManchester Academic Health Science Centre · GB

Funding

National Institute for health and Care Research Policy Research Unit PR-PRU-1217-21502
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundUnpaid carers of older people, and older unpaid carers, experience a range of adverse outcomes. Supporting carers should therefore be a public health priority. Our understanding of what works to support carers could be enhanced if future evaluations prioritise under-researched interventions and outcomes. To support this, we aimed to: map evidence about interventions to support carers, and the outcomes evaluated; and identify key gaps in current evidence.

methodsEvidence gap map review methods were used. Searches were carried out in three bibliographic databases for quantitative evaluations of carer interventions published in OECD high-income countries between 2013 and 2023. Interventions were eligible if they supported older carers (50 + years) of any aged recipient, or any aged carers of older people (50 + years).

findings205 studies reported across 208 publications were included in the evidence map. The majority evaluated the impact of therapeutic and educational interventions on carer burden and carers' mental health. Some studies reported evidence about physical exercise interventions and befriending and peer support for carers, but these considered a limited range of outcomes. Few studies evaluated interventions that focused on delivering financial information and advice, pain management, and physical skills training for carers. Evaluations rarely considered the impact of interventions on carers' physical health, quality of life, and social and financial wellbeing. Very few studies considered whether interventions delivered equitable outcomes.

conclusionEvidence on what works best to support carers is extensive but limited in scope. A disproportionate focus on mental health and burden outcomes neglects other important areas where carers may need support. Given the impact of caring on carers' physical health, financial and social wellbeing, future research could evaluate interventions that aim to support these outcomes. Appraisal of whether interventions deliver equitable outcomes across diverse carer populations is critical.

Indexed as

CaregiversSocial SupportAgedHumansInternationalityQuality of LifeCarersEvidence gap mapsInterventionsOlder peopleOutcomes

Identifiers

PMID38553679
PMCPMC10979610
OpenAlexW4393317802

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.