SynthesisFrontiers in public health2025
The impact of dyadic interventions on psycho-social outcomes for stroke patients and their caregivers: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Frontiers in public health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Nurse-led caregiver training interventions in post-stroke rehabilitation: a systematic review and meta-analysis of functional and psychosocial outcomes.Frontiers in public health · 2026Pooled it
- Dyadic coping in patients with autoimmune diseases and spouses: a latent profile analysis and nursing implications.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- The Impact of a Video-Educational and Tele-Supporting Program on the Caregiver-Stroke Survivor Dyad During Transitional Care (D-STEPS: Dyadic Support Through Tele-Health and Educational Programs in Stroke Care): A Longitudinal Study Protocol.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Aims: To describe the details of dyadic interventions and summarize the current evidence on supporting dyadic interventions for psycho-social outcomes of stroke patients and their caregivers. Design: A systematic review and meta-analysis based on PRISMA guidelines. Data sources: Five English databases (PubMed, Web of Science, CINAHL, Embase and Cochrane Library) were searched to identify eligible studies published from the inception to October 15, 2024. Methods: Two reviewers independently screened the literature in accordance with the selection criteria. The risk of bias of the included studies was assessed using Cochrane RoB 2.0. Relevant information was extracted, narrative synthesis was conducted and the meta-analysis was carried out using Review Manager 5.4 soft. Results: A total of 28 literature were identified and included in this review. These interventions focused mainly on the provision of stroke related knowledge, promotion of family relationships and relief of negative emotions by a face-to-face mode. The outcome indicators can be grouped into three dimensions based on the developmental contextual coping model: dyadic appraisal, dyadic coping and dyadic adjustments. The results of meta-analysis showed that dyadic interventions significantly improved quality of life and coping capacity of patients, promoted family function of caregivers and alleviated caregiver-related burden. Conclusion: These findings highlighted the positive outcomes of dyadic interventions that focused on patients and their caregivers coping with stroke. However, the effectiveness of interventions is not absolute, the evaluation system of intervention effect needs to be improved and demand-driven interventions need to be developed urgently. Therefore, further large-scale randomized controlled trials with a high-quality design are warranted. Systematic review registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/, CRD42024621297.
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.