Perspectives and Experiences of Family Caregivers Using Supportive Mobile Apps in Dementia Care: Meta-Synthesis of Qualitative Research
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Supportive mobile apps are effective tools for family caregivers of persons with dementia to obtain online information and psychological support. Nevertheless, details about the experiences of family caregivers of persons with dementia using mobile apps are limited. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to synthesize the perspectives and experiences of family caregivers of persons with dementia regarding supportive mobile apps. METHODS: We conducted a synthesis of qualitative research and searched 7 English-language databases and 4 Chinese-language databases. We included qualitative studies (peer-reviewed studies and gray literature) written in English and Chinese on the perspectives and experiences of family caregivers of persons with dementia regarding supportive mobile apps published from database establishment to March 2025. Two researchers independently screened the literature and used the JBI Critical Appraisal Checklist for Qualitative Research to conduct quality assessments on the final included studies. Themes were integrated using the 3-stage thematic synthesis approach by Thomas and Harden. RESULTS: A preliminary search yielded 4772 studies, of which 12 (0.25%) met the criteria. The included studies were from 7 different countries or regions, of which the only low- or middle-income country was Brazil. The studies involved a total of 232 family caregivers, most of whom were older adults and female. The integration of extracted content resulted in 4 themes: dynamic changes in value perception-complex attitudes toward mobile app adoption; from tools to partners-a technology-empowered multidimensional support system for family caregivers; external and internal barriers-challenges in family caregivers' use of mobile apps; and person-centered design-future directions for improving mobile apps. CONCLUSIONS: This study found that family caregivers' attitudes toward using supportive mobile apps are influenced by their perceived value of mobile apps and their caregiving burden. In addition, such supportive mobile apps serve as valuable tools for family caregivers to enhance their caregiving abilities and efficiency, alleviate the burden of care, improve negative emotions, foster social connections, and promote self-care. Future mobile app design needs to address obstacles such as design flaws, family caregivers' lack of technological literacy, time constraints, concerns about privacy breaches, and other device-related issues, with particular attention to the ease of use of mobile apps. Meanwhile, developers need to commit to designing personalized and multifunctional mobile apps as well as promote online collaboration among members of the care network. Overall, our study offers an important reference for developing person-centered supportive mobile apps for family caregivers of persons with dementia. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42024510905; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/view/CRD42024510905.
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 | 0.056 | 0.104 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.011 | 0.012 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".