ReviewEuropean journal of ageing2026
Policies for supporting caregivers of older adults with long-term care needs in EU countries: a systematic review.
Review in European journal of ageing, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In the context of population ageing, increasing long-term care needs and constraints on welfare spending, informal caregivers assume a pivotal role as providers of long-term care. This systematic review synthesises reported data on the diverse support policies implemented across the European Union (EU) to assist them. Findings from 35 studies and reports published between 2011 and 2025 suggest that, despite similar demographic challenges, policies diverge significantly, with some EU countries to have established mechanisms beyond financial assistance to support carers, while others, particularly those located in Eastern and Southern EU, to offer less comprehensive support. While the frameworks of defamilialisation (Nordic), supported familialism (Continental), and familialism by default (Southern and Eastern Europe) provide a useful analytical lens to our findings, the review also identifies significant heterogeneities within welfare regimes and even within countries, often driven by decentralisation and regional disparities. Across all models, financial support via cash-for-care schemes and in-kind respite care are the most common instruments, though their generosity and comprehensiveness vary substantially. In contrast, policies such as training, counselling, and flexible work guarantees are less developed, with their availability and access, however, varying significantly across the EU. Furthermore, the review identifies critical gaps in the geographical coverage of existing literature, with certain Southern and Eastern EU countries being particularly understudied. The synthesised evidence provides key implications for policymaking, thoroughly mapping the implementation of diverse social care policies as reported in the international literature.
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.