Strategies for Alleviating the Burden Experienced by Informal Caregivers of Persons With Severe Mental Disorders in Transitional Countries: Protocol for a Scoping Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Caregiver burden is highly prevalent among the informal caregivers of persons with severe mental disorders (SMDs). As such, strategies to support informal caregivers are necessary to enable them to cope with their caregiving role. Currently, there is limited evidence on the extent of existing strategies for supporting informal caregivers of persons with SMDs in transitional countries. OBJECTIVE: This study presents a scoping review protocol to identify and describe the extent and type of evidence on the existing strategies for alleviating caregiver burden among informal caregivers of persons with SMDs in transitional countries. METHODS: This scoping review will be conducted using the Joanna Briggs Institute's methodology for scoping reviews. The participants, concept, and context framework will be used to select relevant studies. This review will include studies on strategies for addressing caregiver burden among informal caregivers, with a specific focus on studies outlining caregiver interventions, caregiver support, and policies with strategies for supporting informal caregivers of persons with SMDs. Relevant studies conducted in transitional countries will be considered for inclusion. There will be no restrictions on publication type or design. Published literature will be accessed by searching electronic databases, including PubMed, MEDLINE, CINAHL, and PsycINFO; ProQuest will be used to access gray literature. Additionally, the reference lists of key studies will be reviewed to identify studies for inclusion. The search will be restricted to articles published between 2011 and 2021. Two reviewers will work independently to screen all abstracts and full texts for inclusion in line with the set inclusion criteria. Extracted data will be categorized and described using descriptive qualitative content analysis. RESULTS: This protocol will guide a scoping review to identify and describe the extent and type of evidence on the existing strategies for alleviating caregiver burden among informal caregivers of persons with SMDs in transitional countries. The main results of this scoping review will synthesize evidence from peer-reviewed and gray literature sources outlining various services and interventions for supporting informal caregivers of people with SMDs in transitional countries. In addition, existing gaps in the literature will be identified to inform future studies. CONCLUSIONS: The increase in caregiver burden among informal caregivers in mental health warrants the development and implementation of strategies for alleviating the burden. This scoping review aims to increase awareness on the various services and intervention strategies for alleviating burden among informal caregivers in transitional countries. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): RR1-10.2196/44268.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.121 | 0.094 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.010 | 0.017 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.017 | 0.015 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.008 | 0.009 |
| Research integrity | 0.010 | 0.008 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.057 | 0.013 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".