Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39828929›Full record

ArticleJMIR formative research2025

Informal Caregivers Connecting on the Web: Content Analysis of Posts on Discussion Forums.

Michelle L Foster, Chinenye Egwuonwu, Erin Vernon, Mohammad Alarifi, M Courtney Hughes

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR formative research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. "We are a club none of us wanted to join": exploring brain tumor online discussion forum content.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2025
    Article
  3. Observational
  4. Bridging care and support: Social services in hospice.Palliative care and social practice · 2025
    Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

5 authors.

Michelle L FosterSchool of Health Studies, Northern Illinois University, DeKalb, IL, United States.ORCID 0009-0003-1786-2686
Chinenye EgwuonwuSchool of Health Studies, Northern Illinois University, DeKalb, IL, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-9905-9306
Erin VernonDepartment of Economics, Seattle University, Seattle, WA, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-9094-3226
Mohammad AlarifiSchool of Health Studies, Northern Illinois University, DeKalb, IL, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-8269-2367
M Courtney HughesSchool of Health Studies, Northern Illinois University, DeKalb, IL, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-8699-5701

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: About 53 million adults in the United States offer informal care to family and friends with disease or disability. Such care has an estimated economic value of US $600 million. Most informal caregivers are not paid nor trained in caregiving, with many experiencing higher-than-average levels of stress and depression and lower levels of physical health. Some informal caregivers participate in web-based forums related to their caregiving role. Objective: This study aimed to explore how informal caregivers use easy-to-access caregiving web-based forums, including the types of information they share and seek from others. It also aimed to gain insights into the informal caregiver experience from the content these informal caregivers posted. Methods: The study population consisted of participants who posted on 5 web-based forums for informal caregivers between February and April 2024. Researchers extracted the first 6 responses to the first 20 questions and comments to appear posted by the informal caregivers in each of the 5 forums, removing any individually identifying information. We used a codebook thematic analysis approach to examine the data with Dedoose (SocioCultural Research Consultants). Researchers independently read all posts and coded the data. The author group discussed the codes, reiteratively refined them, and identified themes within the data. Results: The data consisted of 100 initial posts and 600 responses. Over half of the initial posts included specific questions, with the remaining initial posts sharing experiences or reflections. Posts ranged in length from a sentence to more than 500 words. Domains identified included handling interpersonal challenges, navigating complicated systems, gathering tactical coping strategies, managing emotions, and connecting with others in similar situations. Negative interpersonal interactions were mentioned 123 times, with 77 posts describing challenging situations with extended family. Posters inquired about accessing resources, with health care and health insurance included 51 times, while legal and financial concerns were addressed 124 times. Caregiving challenges were mentioned hundreds of times, including discussion of hygiene (n=18), nutrition (n=21), and desire for a caregiving break (n=47). Posters expressed emotion in their comments 180 times, which included 32 mentions of guilt and 26 mentions of positive emotion. The importance of web-based group support was mentioned 301 times. Conclusions: Informal caregivers play an essential role in society. Many experience multifaceted challenges related to their caregiving role, and some turn to the internet for community. Accessing web-based discussion forums is a low-barrier method for informal caregivers to connect with others who may be experiencing similar emotions and challenges. Gaining a greater understanding of the ways informal caregivers seek advice and offer support to one another provides insight into the challenges they face. The domains identified on these forums may be helpful, as clinicians provide information to care recipients and their informal caregivers along their health journeys.

Indexed as

CaregiversInternetAdultAgedFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedSocial SupportUnited Statesadultscaregiver navigationcaregiverscaregiver supportclinicianscodebookcontent analysisdiscussion forumfamily caregiversinformal careinformal caregiversmedical carepeer-to-peer supportsocial supportsupport groupthematic analysisUnited Statesweb-based communitiesweb-based discussionweb-based forums

Identifiers

PMID39828929
PMCPMC11758710

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.