ArticleThe journals of gerontology. Series B, Psychological sciences and social sciences2024
Confidants and Caregivers: Network Multiplexity and Subjective Well-Being of Older Adults.
Article in The journals of gerontology. Series B, Psychological sciences and social sciences, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Between vulnerability and agency: inner dilemmas and adaptive self-reinvention among widowed older adults living alone in Southwestern China.BMC psychology · 2026Article
- Caregivers serving as confidants: relationship correlates and well-being by care-recipients' dementia status.The journals of gerontology. Series B, Psychological sciences and social sciences · 2026Article
- The mental health implications of informal care receipt stability among older adults with persistent care needs.The journals of gerontology. Series B, Psychological sciences and social sciences · 2025Observational
- Evolution of shared care networks by race and ethnicity: findings from the National Health and Aging Trends Study.The journals of gerontology. Series B, Psychological sciences and social sciences · 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
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesOlder adults rely on personal networks for different types of support. Given shifts in family composition in later adulthood, more work is needed to map network members who can provide multiple aspects of support and the implications for older adults. We explore the phenomenon of having the same network members as both a confidant and a caregiver (multiplexity) and its implications for the well-being of older adults.
methodsUsing the 2011 National Health and Aging Trends Study, we describe the prevalence of having someone as both a confidant and a caregiver (henceforth "multiplex helper") for older adults and examine its association with subjective well-being. We also investigate the differences by having whom as multiplex helpers.
resultsAbout three-quarters (76%) of older adults with at least 1 confidant and 1 caregiver have at least 1 multiplex helper. Partnered older adults are more likely to have any multiplex helpers than unpartnered counterparts and usually nominate their partner as a multiplex helper, whereas the unpartnered are more likely to rely on their children to serve multiple roles, especially for widowed older adults. Having a multiplex helper is associated with better subjective well-being. DISCUSSION: Network multiplexity is prevalent and positively associated with the subjective well-being of older adults who have at least 1 confidant and 1 caregiver, above and beyond having any confidants or caregivers separately. The baseline patterns established in this study lay the groundwork for future research to further explore support dynamics in older adults' networks.
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.