ReviewCureus2026
Self-Care, Hope, and Life Meaning as Predictors of Psychological Resilience in Informal Caregivers of Hemodialysis Patients: A Systematic Review.
Review in Cureus, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Exploring Hope in Patient-Caregiver Dyads Living with Advanced Chronic Disease in Portugal: A Phenomenological Study.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Exploring Satisfaction and Support Needs of Informal Home Caregivers Using Palliative Care Services: A Mixed-Methods Study from Rwanda.Rwanda journal of medicine and health sciences · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe physical, emotional, and psychological difficulties that informal caregivers of hemodialysis patients commonly encounter can jeopardize their health. Spirituality, life purpose, and self-care may be protective variables that increase psychological resilience in this population, according to recent research.
objectiveIn this systematic review, quantitative data on the predictive power of spirituality, life purpose, and self-care in predicting psychological resilience in informal caregivers of hemodialysis patients is critically assessed and synthesized.
methodsA comprehensive search of PubMed, PsycINFO, Scopus, Web of Science, and CINAHL was conducted for studies published between 2010 and 2025. We included quantitative studies that evaluated spirituality, self-care, life meaning, and resilience in informal caregivers of adult hemodialysis patients. Eighteen studies satisfied the inclusion criteria after 65 full-text articles were assessed, 47 entries were filtered by title and abstract, and duplicates were eliminated. Measurement instruments, research features, and statistical correlations were the main topics of data extraction. To assess the quality of the methodology, the Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal Checklists were used. A narrative synthesis was performed since study designs and measures varied widely.
resultsHigher levels of life purpose, spiritual well-being, self-efficacy, hope, and self-care were consistently linked to stronger psychological resilience and less caregiver strain across the 18 investigations. Improved coping mechanisms and reduced stress were observed among caregivers with higher spiritual well-being, a clearer sense of life purpose, or stronger self-care routines. Additionally, resilience mitigated the effects of caregiver stress, which modulated psychological outcomes.
conclusionSpirituality, life purpose, and self-care all have a significant impact on the psychological resilience of informal caregivers of hemodialysis patients. The well-being of caregivers and their ability to provide long-term care may be improved by interventions that focus on these variables.
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.