Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40241162›Full record

ArticleSystematic reviews2025

The impact of technology use for care by informal female caregivers on their well-being: a scoping review.

Andrés Aparicio, María Alejandra Inostroza-Correa, Paula Miranda, Carolina Salinas, Valeria Herskovic, Camila Chackiel, Catalina Alarcón

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in Systematic reviews, 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. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Technology-based applications for relatives and caregivers of people with advanced breast cancer-a scoping review.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2026
    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

7 authors.

Andrés AparicioMillennium Institute for Care Research (MICARE), Santiago, Chile.
María Alejandra Inostroza-CorreaMillennium Institute for Care Research (MICARE), Santiago, Chile. maria.inostroza@uc.cl.ORCID 0000-0003-0756-7352
Paula MirandaMillennium Institute for Care Research (MICARE), Santiago, Chile.
Carolina SalinasFacultad de Derecho, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, Santiago, Chile.
Valeria HerskovicFacultad de Ingeniería, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, Santiago, Chile.
Camila ChackielInstituto de Sociología, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, Santiago, Chile.
Catalina AlarcónInstituto de Sociología, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, Santiago, Chile.

Funding

ANID Millennium Science Initiative Program ICS2019_024Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile II202316
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionInformal caregiving roles are predominantly assumed by women, who often experience unique challenges related to physical, emotional, and social stress due to entrenched gender disparities. Within this context, the use of technologies to assist in caregiving tasks has become popular, and some evidence about their impact on caregiver well-being is available. However, significant research gaps persist. This scoping review was intended to assess the extent of literature examining the impact of technology use by informal female caregivers on their quality of life, to characterize existing research gaps, and to identify available evidence regarding gender-specific challenges.

methodsWe searched for studies in English, Spanish, and Portuguese published in peer-reviewed journals since 2018. We included studies exploring how informal female caregivers use technology and how such use impacts their well-being. The studies included in the review analyze the impact of technology use on the physical, emotional, or material well-being of informal female caregivers. Sources were screened in stages by two independent reviewers; data were extracted from selected full texts, and results were integrated into a narrative summary.

resultsA total of 14 studies were included in the review, highlighting a range of technologies such as health monitoring devices, communication platforms, and assistive aids. The review identified improvements in caregiver well-being related to reduced physical burden, enhanced emotional support, and increased social connectivity. However, significant research gaps were noted, particularly regarding the long-term effects of technology use, differences based on socio-economic contexts, and the limited inclusion of gender-specific analyses.

conclusionsThis review supports the notion that technology use can positively impact the well-being of informal female caregivers, especially in terms of emotional and social support. Nevertheless, the review also found that in certain situations, technology can fail to improve or even worsen the quality of life of caregivers. However, the limited availability of studies with standardized quantitative measures, gender-specific data, and comprehensive assessments of long-term effects highlights areas for future research. Further exploration into diverse sociocultural contexts and empirical model development will be essential to better understand the nuanced ways in which technology use influences caregiver quality of life. These findings underscore the potential for targeted technology solutions to support informal caregivers, with implications for healthcare professionals and policymakers designing caregiver support initiatives.

Indexed as

CaregiversQuality of LifeSelf-Help DevicesTechnologyFemaleHumansSocial SupportStress, PsychologicalCareGenderQuality of lifeToolsVulnerability

Identifiers

PMID40241162
PMCPMC12004744

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.