Digital Health Interventions for Informal Family Caregivers of People With First-Episode Psychosis: Systematic Review on User Experience and Effectiveness
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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.
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 | 0.006 | 0.032 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.000 |
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.
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".