ReviewHealthcare (Basel, Switzerland)2024
Effectiveness of Online Programmes for Family Carers of People with Intellectual Disabilities: Systematic Review of the International Evidence Base.
Review in Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Type and efficacy of online training for informal carers: a narrative review.Frontiers in public health · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
This systematic literature review examines the evidence base on the effectiveness of online programmes on the mental health and well-being of family carers of people with intellectual disabilities. Databases (ERIC, Medline, PsycINFO and CINAHL) were searched for intervention studies that considered online interventions for family carers of people with intellectual disabilities. Data were extracted using standardised data extraction tools. Bias was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool for randomised trials (RoB 2). Screening, extraction and assessment of bias were completed independently by two members of the research team. Given the low number of included studies and different outcomes assessed within them, it was not possible to conduct a meta-analysis; therefore, data are presented narratively. Two studies met the criteria to be included in the review. Both studies utilised a feasibility randomised controlled trial methodology. One study found a significant decrease in parental stress, while the other found a significant increase in psychological well-being. Caution must be taken in drawing firm conclusions, given the small sample sizes and low retention rates in both studies. Online programmes seem to offer potential benefits to family carers of people with intellectual disabilities. However, further investigation is needed to examine these programmes, adopting a collaborative approach with family carers.
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.