Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42390861›Full record

ArticleJAMA network open2026

Friend Caregivers Among Older Adults.

Yee To Ng, Vicki A Freedman, Kira S Birditt, Amanda N Leggett

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JAMA network open, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

4 authors.

Yee To NgThe Institute for Social Research, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.
Vicki A FreedmanThe Institute for Social Research, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.
Kira S BirdittThe Institute for Social Research, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.
Amanda N LeggettInstitute of Gerontology, Wayne State University, Detroit, Michigan.

Funding

Statistical Data EnclaveP30AG012846 · NIA · UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN AT ANN ARBOR · PI VICKI A. FREEDMAN · 1999 to 2026
$23.2M
Trends and Dynamics in Caregiving for Alzheimer’s Disease and Related Dementias: Extending the National Study of CaregivingR01AG062477 · NIA · UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN AT ANN ARBOR · PI FREEDMAN, VICKI A., WOLFF, JENNIFER L. · 2019 to 2023
$10.0M
Profiling Psychosocial Dementia Caregiving Networks: The Impact of Dementia Care Networks on Care Outcomes of Medicare Enrollee Persons Living with DementiaR01AG079097 · NIA · WAYNE STATE UNIVERSITY · PI LEGGETT, AMANDA NOEL · 2022 to 2025
$1.9M
NIA NIH HHS P30 AG012846NIA NIH HHS R01 AG062477NIA NIH HHS R01 AG079097
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: Changes in family structure in the US may be a driving force behind the growing need for friend caregivers. Yet, this segment of caregivers is often overlooked in health care settings and related research. Objective: To provide national estimates of friend caregivers, compare the characteristics of care provided by friend vs family caregivers, and identify characteristics of older adults associated with receiving care from friends. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional analysis of the 2023 National Health and Aging Trends Study included data on older adults (aged ≥65 years). Exposure: Sociodemographic and health-related characteristics of care recipients. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was having a friend who provided assistance in the past month due to health or functional limitations. Adjusted Wald tests were used for continuous variables and Rao-Scott χ2 tests for categorical variables to compare characteristics of care provided by friend versus family caregivers and of care recipients receiving friend-involved versus family-only care. Multivariable logistic regression was used to identify older adult characteristics independently associated with friend involvement in care networks. Results: This study included 451 friend and 4985 family caregivers identified by 2619 older adults with activity limitations (weighted mean [SE] age, 78.7 [0.25] years; 63.2% [95% CI, 60.5%-65.9%] female) representing 2.4 million friend caregivers and 21.4 million family caregivers providing care to approximately 12.2 million recipients. Compared with family caregivers, friend caregivers were less likely to coreside with the care recipient (3.3% [95% CI, 1.6%-6.7%] vs 46.4% [95% CI, 44.2%-48.6%]; P < .001) or serve as the sole caregiver (11.1% [95% CI, 7.7%-15.9%] vs 21.2% [95% CI, 19.4%-23.3%]; P < .001). Although they provided fewer care hours per month than family caregivers (mean [SE], 18.1 [3.8] vs 66.6 [2.7] hours; P < .001), friends were more likely to help with transportation (65.7% [95% CI, 59.8%-71.2%] vs 52.7% [95% CI, 50.6%-54.8%]; P < .001), specialize in a single domain of care (66.4% [95% CI, 60.6%-71.9%] vs 33.6% [95% CI, 31.7%-35.5%]; P < .001), and share care with others. In multivariable models, being older (odds ratio [OR], 0.97; 95% CI, 0.95-0.99; P = .002) and married (OR, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.31-0.97; P = .01) were associated with a lower likelihood of having friends involved in the care network, whereas having a college degree (OR, 1.66; 95% CI, 1.14-2.43; P = .01) and living alone (OR, 2.29; 95% CI, 1.50-3.50; P < .001) were associated with a greater likelihood of having friends involved in the care network. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cross-sectional study of Medicare beneficiaries aged 65 years and older, friend caregivers represented a specialized segment of the unpaid caregiving workforce, particularly for older adults lacking family resources. Understanding how friends provide care can help health care professionals better recognize them as an integral part of the caregiving network.

Indexed as

CaregiversFriendsAgedAged, 80 and overCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHumansMaleSocial SupportUnited States

Identifiers

PMID42390861
PMCPMC13329707

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.