Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39514690›Full record

SynthesisRevista da Escola de Enfermagem da U S P2024

Post-informal caregiver's perspectives and experiences of the support network: a systematic literature review and meta-synthesis.

Catarina Inês Costa Afonso, Ana Cristina Spinola Madeira, Susana Pinto Leite Vasconcelos Teixeira de Magalhães

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Revista da Escola de Enfermagem da U S P, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
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

3 authors.

Catarina Inês Costa AfonsoInstituto Politécnico de Santarém, Escola Superior de Saúde, Centro de Investigação em Tecnologias e Serviços de Saúde, Porto, Portugal.ORCID 0000-0001-7969-8242
Ana Cristina Spinola MadeiraInstituto Politécnico de Santarém, Escola Superior de Saúde, Centro de Investigação em Tecnologias e Serviços de Saúde, Porto, Portugal.ORCID 0000-0003-0721-3343
Susana Pinto Leite Vasconcelos Teixeira de MagalhãesUniversidade do Porto, Instituto de Investigação e Inovação em Saúde (i3S), Porto, Portugal.ORCID 0000-0002-3440-4244

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo examine and synthesize the evidence of experiences and perspectives on the specific context of informal post-care and the existing support network.

methodThis is a qualitative systematic review with metasynthesis, according to the framework of the JBI, carried out in the CINAHL, LILACS, MEDLINE, BVS and PsycINFO databases, with no time limit. The articles were evaluated using the JBI Qualitative Data Extraction Tool. A total of 1,236 articles was identified, of which 18 were selected and 7 were analyzed. The level of evidence found was moderate.

resultsThe experiences and perspectives of the informal post-caregiver reveal the need for support, namely: in personal development - attribution of meaning, in self-care perspectives and in identity reconstruction; in managing the impact of the legacy of caring - discontinuity of support in the trajectory of caring, financial vulnerability, and the impact on mental health; formal and informal resources for the future - projection of the future, structured services and family and community support.

conclusionPost-caregivers' perception of their support network is that their individual and interpersonal needs are not identified, and that formal and informal services are not articulated.

Indexed as

CaregiversSocial SupportHumansQualitative Research

Identifiers

PMID39514690
PMCPMC11548915

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.