MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409461060 · doi:10.4102/hsag.v30i0.2901

The needs of family members caring for people living with mental illness: An integrated review

2025· review· en· W4409461060 on OpenAlex
Keletwaetse Sakwape, Gaotswake Patience Kovane, Precious Chibuike Chukwuere, Miriam M. Moagi, Rorisang Machailo

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueHealth SA Gesondheid · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicFamily Caregiving in Mental Illness
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNorth-West University
KeywordsMental illnessPsychologyNursingMental healthGerontologyPsychiatryMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Family members caring for people living with mental illness (PLWMI) are prone to grapple with caregiver burden. The caregivers often contend with a decline in their mental and physical well-being while executing their role. This exploration aimed to understand the needs of family caregivers of PLWMI. Aim: An integrative review was conducted to analyse the existing literature on the needs of family caregivers for PLWMI. Method: The review adhered to the instructions provided by Toronto and Remington, drawing upon the guidance of Whittemore and Knafl. The search used four electronic databases: PubMed, African journals, EBSCOhost and Scopus. After screening 3253 references, 18 studies (10 qualitative, 4 quantitative and 4 mixed methods) were included. Results: The review identified various needs of PLWMI caregivers, including the need for support (financial, social, peer and psychological), psychoeducation, community acceptance of family caregivers, and comprehensive family caregiver health assessments. Conclusion: This review recognises the significance of addressing the needs of the caregivers of PLWMI to alleviate the impact of caregiver role strain. Promoting nursing care that recognises the importance of caregiver-oriented practice in healthcare is essential. This can help address the needs of the caregivers, enhance their ability to cope with caregiver role strain and promote a better quality of life. Contribution: This review may inform policymakers to ensure the need for mental health practice to demonstrate knowledge in caring for caregivers of PLWMI. Furthermore, there is a need to integrate the management of PLWMI with that of the caregivers.

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.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.809
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.395
Teacher spread0.344 · 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