Digital Health Interventions for Informal Family Caregivers of People With First-Episode Psychosis: Systematic Review on User Experience and Effectiveness
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: First-episode psychosis (FEP) imposes a substantial burden not only on the individual affected but also on their families. Given that FEP usually occurs during adolescence, families overtake a big part of informal care. Early family interventions, especially psychoeducation, are crucial for informal family caregivers to best support the recovery of their loved one with FEP and to reduce the risk of a psychotic relapse as much as possible, but also to avoid chronic stress within the family due to the burden of care. Digital health interventions offer the possibility to access help quicker, use less resources, and improve informal family caregiver outcomes, for example, by reducing stress and improving caregiver quality of life. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to systematically identify studies on digital health interventions for informal family caregivers of people with FEP and to describe and synthesize the available literature on user experience, as well as the effectiveness of such digital applications on the clinical outcomes, consisting of (1) perceived caregiver stress, (2) expressed emotion, and (3) parental self-efficacy. METHODS: A systematic search was carried out across 4 electronic databases. In addition, reference lists of relevant studies were hand-searched. This review aimed to include only primary studies on informal family caregivers, who had to care for a person with FEP between 15 years and 40 years of age and a diagnosis of FEP with onset of observed symptoms within the past 5 years. All types of digital interventions were included. This systematic review is aligned with the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis) 2020 guidelines. RESULTS: The search identified 7 studies that reported on user experience or effectiveness of digital health interventions on perceived caregiver stress, expressed emotion, and parental self-efficacy, including 377 informal family FEP caregivers across trials. Digital health interventions-web-based, videoconferences, and mHealth-were well accepted and perceived as relevant, easy to use, and helpful by informal family FEP caregivers. Psychoeducational content was rated as the most important across studies. Perceived caregiver stress, expressed emotion, and parental self-efficacy improved in all studies that reported on these clinical outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this review suggest that digital health interventions aimed at informal family caregivers of individuals with FEP can improve relevant clinical outcomes, with participants reporting a positive user experience. However, for some interventions reviewed, specialized in-person family care outperformed the digital intervention and partially led to better results in perceived caregiver stress and parental self-efficacy. Therefore, while digital interventions present a promising approach to alleviate the burden of care and improve informal family FEP caregiver outcomes, more studies with well-powered experimental designs are needed to further investigate the effectiveness of such applications in this population. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42024536715; https://tinyurl.com/bdd3u7v9.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,006 | 0,032 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,005 | 0,006 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,006 | 0,005 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,006 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».