MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Effectiveness of interventions for informal caregivers of people with end-stage chronic illness: a systematic review

2024· other· en· W6958576325 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueFigshare · 2024
Typeother
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant Disease Management Techniques
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychosocialPsychological interventionIntervention (counseling)Social supportQuality of life (healthcare)Inclusion (mineral)MEDLINE

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background People living with advanced, non-malignant chronic conditions often have extensive and complex care needs. Informal or family caregivers often provide the care and support needed by those with advanced chronic conditions at home. These informal caregivers experience many challenges associated with their caring role, which can impact their own wellbeing. Whilst there is growing evidence around the impact on carers, guidance on support for informal caregivers of patients with advanced, non-malignant, chronic conditions is lacking, with little evidence available on effective psychosocial carer interventions. This systematic review explored existing interventions for caregivers of those with advanced, non-malignant, chronic illness, in order to assess the effectiveness of these interventions in improving psychosocial outcomes. Methods Electronic databases, Medline, CINAHL, EMBASE, and PsycINFO, were searched up to the end of March 2023. Studies meeting the inclusion criteria, focusing on interventions to improve psychosocial outcomes, such as depression, anxiety, quality of life, and caregiver burden, in this cohort of caregivers were included. Data were extracted regarding study setting, design, methods, intervention components, and outcomes. Risk of bias and quality assessment were conducted. Results A total of 5281 articles were screened, ultimately identifying 12 studies for inclusion, reported in 13 publications. A narrative synthesis revealed mixed results. Psychosocial interventions resulted in more significant improvements in psychosocial outcomes than psychoeducational or support interventions, with interventions for carer-patient dyads also reflecting more positive outcomes for caregivers. Evidence-based interventions, guided by an appropriate theoretical model, were reportedly more effective in improving caregiver outcomes. Differences in outcomes were related to intervention development, design, delivery, and outcome assessment. Conclusions This review, to our knowledge, is the first to explore the effectiveness of interventions in improving psychosocial outcomes for caregivers of those with advanced, non-malignant, chronic conditions. The review highlights the need for more robust, sufficiently powered, high-quality trials of evidence-based interventions for caregivers of people with advanced chronic illness. Optimal intervention duration and frequency of sessions are unclear and need further exploration.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Dataset · Consensus signal: Dataset
Teacher disagreement score0.191
Threshold uncertainty score0.964

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0370.000

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.244 · 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.

Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreDataset

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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFigshareSame topicPlant Disease Management TechniquesFrench-language works237,207