ArticlePloS one2024
Acceptability testing of the Carers-ID intervention to support the mental health of family carers of people with profound and multiple intellectual disabilities.
Article in PloS one, 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.
- Trial
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundProviding care and support for a person with intellectual disabilities can be challenging and may negatively impact on family carers' health and wellbeing. A online support programme was co-designed with charitable organisations and family carers, to help meet the mental health and wellbeing needs of family carers.
objectiveTo test the acceptability of a newly developed online support programme for carers of people with profound and multiple intellectual disabilities.
methodsA sequential mixed-methods explanatory design was utilised. An adapted version of the Acceptability of Health Apps among Adolescents Scale was distributed to family carers across the United Kingdom and Ireland who had viewed the Carers-ID.com intervention. Participants were then invited to take part in an online interview. Qualitative and quantitative data were analysed separately and then brought together through the triangulation protocol.
resultsSeventy family carers (47 female, 23 male) responded to the acceptability survey, with 10 (7 female, 3 male) taking part in interviews. Carers expressed high levels of programme acceptability (mean = 75.43 out of 88). Six themes were generated from interviews with family carers; i) time is precious, ii) the breadth and depth of module content, iii) it was somebody's experience; it was meaningful, iv) won't work for everyone, v) representation: people I could identify with, and vi) module specific suggestions for future changes. Based on our triangulation, four areas of convergence were identified: programme usability and ease, attitudes towards the programme, perceptions of effectiveness, and programme relatability.
conclusionsTo be acceptable, online interventions for carers of people with intellectual disability need to be accessible, understandable and easy to use, as carers' free time can be limited. It would be important to investigate the effectiveness of online interventions for family carers, specifically considering which carers the intervention works for, and for whom it may not.
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.