ReviewPublic health reviews2025
Digital Informal Care: The Use of Technology in Family Care. A Scoping Review.
Review in Public health reviews, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Accounting for the Unaccounted in AI and Care: Bringing Young Carers into the AI Realm.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Factors influencing implementation of telemedicine in rural dementia care services in high-income countries: a scoping review.BMC health services research · 2026Article
- Digital Informal Care: The Use of Technology in Family Care. A Scoping Review.Public health reviews · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: To map the recent literature on digital health in informal caregiving, identify commonly used technologies, their functions and impact, as well as barriers and facilitators. Methods: We searched Medline, Web of Science, and CINAHL for randomized controlled trials and quasi-experimental, observational, and qualitative studies, published in English between 2019 and 2024. Results: 110 studies were included, most of which targeted informal caregivers in dementia care and used moderately complex, consumer-facing technologies for education and caregiving support. Positive impact was reported on various outcomes such as caregiver burden, psychological wellbeing, caregiver competence, quality of life, caregiver-patient relationships, as well as care coordination and efficiency. Barriers included limited digital literacy, technical issues, low accessibility, caregiving burden, and data security concerns. Facilitators were good digital skills, social and emotional support, user-friendly designs, and perceived usefulness. Conclusion: Digital informal care is emerging and shows promise in supporting informal caregivers by improving their wellbeing, skills, and connectedness. However, barriers and knowledge gaps remain, highlighting the need for additional research as well as more inclusive and person-centred digital informal care approaches.
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.