ArticlePloS one2026
Informal care outside the household by older people and cardiovascular health of caregivers: A Cross-Sectional Analysis of the SHARE European study.
Article in PloS one, 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Social isolation is an established cardiovascular risk factor, but the health implications of providing social support remain understudied. We examined whether informal care outside the household is associated with any self-reported cardiovascular disease. We conducted a cross-sectional analysis of 62,881 community-dwelling adults aged 50-84 from 28 countries (SHARE Wave 9, 2021-2022), using multivariable logistic regression with country fixed effects, clustered standard errors, E-values for unmeasured confounding, and sequential exclusions to probe reverse causality. The primary model adjusted for confounders only (age, sex, education, marital status, household wealth, and country); models additionally adjusting for potential mediators were treated as secondary. Among 16,178 informal carers (25.7%), the prevalence of any self-reported cardiovascular disease was 8.8% versus 12.8% in non-carers. In the confounder-adjusted model, informal care was associated with 15% lower odds of any self-reported cardiovascular disease (OR=0.85, 95% CI: 0.78-0.93; E-value 1.39 using the square-root odds-ratio-to-risk-ratio conversion appropriate for a common outcome, or 1.64 treating the odds ratio directly as a risk ratio, which overstates robustness). The association persisted after excluding care recipients and those with functional limitations, attenuated towards the null after excluding those in poor self-rated health, and was similar across age groups and sexes. Inference was robust to a pairs-cluster bootstrap and to population-averaged and random-intercept models, and to a weighted sensitivity analysis using SHARE calibrated weights (OR=0.78, 95% CI: 0.63-0.96).. Because the outcome reflects lifetime self-reported diagnoses and the design is cross-sectional, temporality cannot be established and the findings should be interpreted as hypothesis-generating. Informal care was consistently associated with lower prevalence of any self-reported cardiovascular disease and may be a marker of healthier cardiovascular ageing rather than a demonstrated cause of it.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42853871What 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.