MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412706284 · doi:10.2196/72141

Family Caregivers of Individuals With Neuromuscular Disease Participating in a Randomized Controlled Trial of a Digital Peer Support Program: Nested Qualitative Study

2025· article· en· W4412706284 on OpenAlexafffund
Samantha Mekhuri, Craig Dale, Francine Buchanan, Nouma Hammash, Munazzah Ambreen, Sian Saha, Louise Rose, Reshma Amin

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Medical Internet Research · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicChildhood Cancer Survivors' Quality of Life
Canadian institutionsHealth Sciences CentreUniversity of TorontoSpinal Cord Injury OntarioInstitute for Clinical Evaluative SciencesSunnybrook Health Science CentreHospital for Sick Children
FundersMuscular Dystrophy Canada
KeywordsRandomized controlled trialPeer supportSocial supportPsychologyIntervention (counseling)DyadQualitative researchFamily caregiversClinical psychologyMedicineNursingSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Family caregivers have primary responsibility for providing care in the home for people with neuromuscular diseases (NMDs). This may negatively affect caregiver health. Peer support may enhance quality of life and reduce stress among family caregivers, but few trials have been conducted in NMD caregivers. Therefore, we conducted a randomized controlled trial with a nested qualitative evaluation (this report) of a 12-week digital peer support intervention for family caregivers of children and adults with NMD. Objective: The aim of the study is to gain insights into the perspectives of intervention participants and peer mentors regarding their experiences with the trial's digital peer support program. Methods: We conducted a nested exploratory qualitative study (August 2022 to March 2024), recruiting participants who were randomized to the intervention arm of the randomized controlled trial and study mentors. We conducted semistructured interviews via videoconferencing. Homophily theory and the theoretical framework of acceptability informed our analyses. Results: We interviewed 21 participants and 10 mentors, identifying four themes: (1) program participation motivators, (2) program expectations and appreciation, (3) program appropriateness, and (4) the peer mentor-mentee dyad. We found that participants were motivated to join the program due to existing caregiver burden and social isolation. Participants and mentors appreciated the program's sense of community and flexible digital format, with participants valuing emotional and informational support. However, challenges in relating to each other's situations due to participant and mentor heterogeneity in the extent of the care recipient's needs were perceived to limit benefit. Conclusions: Peer support was perceived as potentially beneficial in relieving caregiver burden and social isolation, creating a sense of community that provides emotional and informational support. The digital and flexible format was an important facilitator. An important barrier was participant-mentor heterogeneity resulting in reduced perception of homophily. These findings can inform the development of other digital peer support programs to alleviate caregiver burden and isolation and provide emotional relief and informational guidance.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.042
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.067
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.042
Threshold uncertainty score0.225

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0420.067
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0040.003
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.092
GPT teacher head0.498
Teacher spread0.406 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations4
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Medical Internet ResearchSame topicChildhood Cancer Survivors' Quality of LifeFrench-language works237,207