ArticleJournal of the American Geriatrics Society2024
Is more care recipient time at home also a family caregiver-centered quality of life measure?
Article in Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Measuring health spillover effects in household members of adolescents and elderly individuals with health issues in China.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2026Article
- Measuring and valuing spillover effects in caregivers and families: A scoping review.PloS one · 2026Article
- Home Time Following Emergency Department Visits Among People With Dementia.JAMA network open · 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
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundTime in healthcare facilities is associated with worse patient quality of life (QoL); however, impact on family caregiver QoL is unknown. We evaluate care recipient days not at home-days in the emergency department (ED), inpatient (IP) care, and post-acute care (PAC)-to understand how care recipient days not at home correspond to family caregiver QoL.
methodsSecondary data were linked to care recipient utilization data. Elastic net machine learning models were used to evaluate the impact of a single day of utilization in each setting on binary QoL outcomes. We also compared composite weighted and unweighted "days not at home" variables. Two time periods, 6 and 18 months, were used to predict three caregiver QoL measures (self-rated health, depressive symptoms, and subjective burden).
resultsIn the 6-month timeframe, a single day of ED utilization was associated with increased likelihood of poor QoL for all three assessed outcomes (range: 1.4%-3.2%). A day of PAC was associated to a modest degree with increased likelihood of caregiver burden (0.2%) and depressive symptoms (0.1%), with a slight protective effect for self-rated health (-0.1%). An IP day had a slight protective effect (-0.2 to -0.1%). At 18 months, ED and IP had similar, albeit more muted, relationships with caregiver burden and depressive symptoms. PAC had a slight protective effect for caregiver burden (-0.1%). Cumulative days in all settings combined generally was not associated with caregiver QoL.
conclusionWhereas total care recipient time away from home had some negative spillovers to family caregivers, the countervailing effects of unique settings on caregiver QoL may mask net QoL effects. This finding limits the utility of a single care recipient home time measure as a valid caregiver-centered measure. Considering cumulative care recipient time in individual settings separately may be needed to reveal the true net effects on caregiver QoL.
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.