MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4387348397 · doi:10.2196/48587

Strategies to Alleviate the Burden Experienced by Informal Caregivers of Persons With Severe Mental Disorders in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: Scoping Review

2023· article· en· W4387348397 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Olindah Silaule, Daleen Casteleijn, Fasloen Adams, Nokuthula Gloria Nkosi

Bibliographic record

VenueInteractive Journal of Medical Research · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicFamily Caregiving in Mental Illness
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAfrican Population and Health Research CenterWellcome TrustCarnegie Corporation of New York
KeywordsCINAHLPsycINFOPsychological interventionMental healthContext (archaeology)MEDLINEInclusion (mineral)Caregiver burdenLow and middle income countriesMedicineDeveloping countryHealth carePsychologyNursingGerontologyPsychiatryPolitical scienceEconomic growthDementiaSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: There is considerable evidence of the burden of care encountered by informal caregivers of persons with severe and enduring mental health conditions in low- and middle-income countries. Previous studies have highlighted the need to support these informal caregivers as key players in the care of these patients. To date, limited evidence exists on the extent and types of strategies for supporting these informal caregivers in low- and middle-income countries. OBJECTIVE: This scoping review aims to identify and describe the extent and type of evidence on the existing strategies for alleviating the burden of care among informal caregivers of persons with severe and enduring mental health conditions in low- and middle-income countries. METHODS: A systematic literature search was completed following the Joanna Briggs Institute methodology for scoping reviews. The participants, concept, and context framework was used to guide the search for literature sources across 5 databases: PubMed, MEDLINE, CINAHL, and PsycINFO for published literature and ProQuest for unpublished literature. This review included studies that reported on strategies for alleviating the burden of care among informal caregivers of persons with severe and enduring mental health conditions, with a focus on studies that evaluated or recommended caregiver interventions and support strategies in low- and middle-income countries. The search was limited to studies conducted between 2001 and 2021, and only papers written in English were considered for inclusion. Using the Covidence software (Veritas Health Innovation), 2 reviewers independently screened the papers, applied the inclusion and exclusion criteria, and met biweekly to discuss and resolve conflicts. The relevant studies and reported outcomes were summarized, organized, and analyzed descriptively using numeric summary analysis and deductive content analysis. RESULTS: Of the 18,342 studies identified, 44 (0.24%) met the inclusion criteria. The included studies were from 16 low- and middle-income countries in Asia, Africa, Europe, and South and North America. Most studies (21/44, 48%) were randomized controlled trials conducted in Asian countries. The identified strategies were grouped into 2 categories: implemented and recommended intervention strategies. Identified strategies included community-based interventions, psychoeducation interventions, support groups, cognitive behavioral therapy, spirituality-based interventions, and smartphone-based interventions. In addition, mindfulness and empowerment, collaborative interventions, standard care, financial and social support, counseling, occupation-based interventions, policy and legislature, and access to mental health care were identified. Psychoeducation and support group interventions were identified as common strategies for alleviating the burden of care among informal caregivers of persons with severe and enduring mental health conditions. CONCLUSIONS: This review provides evidence on the types of implemented and recommended strategies for alleviating the burden of care among informal caregivers in low- and middle-income countries. Although psychoeducational interventions were the most preferred strategy for alleviating burden, their benefits were short-lived when compared with peer-led support groups. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): RR2-10.2196/44268.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.153
Threshold uncertainty score0.844

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.039
GPT teacher head0.434
Teacher spread0.395 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations12
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInteractive Journal of Medical ResearchSame topicFamily Caregiving in Mental IllnessFrench-language works237,207