Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38776139›Full record

ArticleJMIR formative research2024

Adapting a Dutch Web-Based Intervention to Support Family Caregivers of People With Dementia in the UK Context: Accelerated Experience-Based Co-Design.

Fiona Scheibl, Lizzy Boots, Ruth Eley, Christopher Fox, Fergus Gracey, Karen Harrison Dening, Jan Oyebode, Bridget Penhale, Fiona Poland, Gemma Ridel and 2 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR formative research, 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
–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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Evaluating the Co-Design and Implementation of a Multicomponent Intervention to Improve Communication in Aged Care: A Nested Process Evaluation Protocol.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
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

12 authors.

Fiona ScheiblInstitute of Applied Health Research, College of Medical and Dental Sciences, Birmingham, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9115-1247
Lizzy BootsDepartment of Psychiatry and Neuropsychology, Alzheimer Center Limburg, Mental Health and Neuroscience Research Institute, Maastricht University Medical Centre+, Maastricht, Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8309-4502
Ruth EleyTogether Everyday in Dementia, Liverpool, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0037-530X
Christopher FoxCollege House, University of Exeter, Devon, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9480-5704
Fergus GraceyFaculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, University of East Anglia, Norwich, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1416-7894
Karen Harrison DeningDementia UK, London, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7635-644X
Jan OyebodeCentre for Applied Dementia Studies, Faculty of Health Studies, University of Bradford, Bradford, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0263-8740
Bridget PenhaleFaculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, University of East Anglia, Norwich, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8487-0606
Fiona PolandFaculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, University of East Anglia, Norwich, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0003-6911
Gemma RidelResearch and Development, Norfolk and Suffolk NHS Foundation Trust, Norwich, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6251-3958
Juniper WestResearch and Development, Norfolk and Suffolk NHS Foundation Trust, Norwich, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0802-7243
Jane L CrossFaculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, University of East Anglia, Norwich, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7003-1916

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAround 700,000 family caregivers provide unpaid care for 900,000 people living with dementia in the United Kingdom. Few family caregivers receive support for their own psychological needs and funding for community respite services has declined. These trends are seen across Europe as demographic and budgetary pressures have intensified due to public spending cuts arising from the 2008 financial crisis and the COVID-19 pandemic. The World Health Organization has prioritized the need to expand the provision of support for caregivers and families of people with dementia by 2025. Web-based interventions have the potential for development as they require modest investment and can be accessed by family caregivers at home. Further cost benefits can be realized by adapting existing interventions with demonstrated effectiveness for new contexts. This paper reports initial findings from the CareCoach study, which is adapting Partner in Balance (PiB), a web-based coaching intervention developed in the Netherlands, for family caregivers in the United Kingdom.

objectiveThis study aims to work with unpaid family caregivers and staff in adapting the Dutch web-based support tool PiB to improve its acceptability and usability for use in the United Kingdom.

methodsAccelerated Experience-Based Co-Design (AEBCD) was used with caregivers, staff, and core stakeholders. Interviews, workshops, and stakeholder consultations were conducted. Data were analyzed iteratively. Recommendations for the redesign of PiB for use across the United Kingdom were adjudicated by the study Adaptation Working Party.

resultsSixteen caregivers and 17 staff took part in interviews. Thirteen caregivers and 17 staff took part in workshops. Most (n=26) participants were White, female, and retired. All except 4 caregivers (2 male and 2 female) found the PiB's offer of web-based self-help learning acceptable. Caregivers identified complexity and lack of inclusivity in some wording and video resources as problematic. The staff took a stronger perspective on the lack of inclusivity in PiB video resources. Staff and caregivers coproduced new inclusive wording and recommended creating new videos to adapt PiB for the UK context.

conclusionsAEBCD methods facilitated the engagement of caregivers and staff and advanced the adaptation of the PiB complex intervention. An important addition to the AEBCD method in this process was the work of an Adaptation Working Party, which adjudicated and agreed to new wording where this could not be established in consultation with caregivers and staff.

trial registrationISRCTN Registry ISRCTN12540555; https://doi.org/10.1186/ISRCTN12540555.

Indexed as

adaptationcaregivercaregiverscarerco-designcommunity-baseddementiafamily carerinterventionself-help, web-basedservicesstaffsupportUnited Kingdomweb-based interventionweb-based resourcesweb-based support

Identifiers

PMID38776139
PMCPMC11153978

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.