Get help now — free helplines

You can call any of these for free. You do not need a diagnosis, an appointment, or a crisis to call — questions and plain exhaustion are reasons enough.

  • Alzheimer's Association 24/7 Helpline 800-272-3900 24 hours a day, 365 days a year Free, confidential support and information for people with dementia, caregivers, families and the public. Master's-level clinicians. Also Spanish.
  • 988 Suicide & Crisis Lifeline 988 24/7 Call or text 988, or chat at 988lifeline.org. For anyone in emotional distress or a mental-health crisis, including caregivers.
  • Alzheimer's Foundation of America (AFA) Helpline 866-232-8484 9:00 am - 9:00 pm ET, seven days a week Licensed social workers providing support, info and referrals. Also text message and web chat. Text: 646-586-5283

In a medical emergency, call 911. More numbers, and what each line does, on the help page.

This page is alzhub.org's plain-English summary of a published study, not the paper itself. It is generated from the record we hold for this study, sourced and linked below — check the original for the full text and methods.

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 63 out of 100. Caregiving

Topic: Risk, prevention and care in population studies

Objective Because of the expected increase in the number of dementia patients, the unlikelihood of a cure in the near future, and the rising cost of care, there is an increasing need for effective caregiver interventions. Internet interventions hold considerable promise for meeting the educational and support needs of informal dementia caregivers at reduced costs. The current study aims to provide an overview of the evidence for the effectiveness, feasibility, and quality of Internet interventions for informal caregivers of people with dementia. Methods A systematic literature search of five scientific databases was performed, covering literature published up to 10 January 2013. Twelve studies were identified. The quality of the included studies was assessed according to the Cochrane level of evidence and the criteria list of the Cochrane Back Review Group. Results The intervention types, dosage, and duration differed widely, as did the methodological quality of the included studies. The overall level of evidence was low. However, the results demonstrate that Internet interventions for informal dementia caregivers can improve various aspects of caregiver well-being, for example, confidence, depression, and self-efficacy, provided they comprise multiple components and are tailored to the individual. Furthermore, caregivers could benefit from interaction with a coach and other caregivers. Conclusions Internet interventions for informal dementia caregivers may improve caregiver well-being. However, the available supporting evidence lacks methodological quality. More randomized controlled studies assessing interventions performed according to protocol are needed to give stronger statements about the effects of supportive Internet interventions and their most promising elements.

Key findings

Why it matters

This review of Internet-based support for dementia caregivers found the overall level of evidence was low, with wide differences in intervention type, dose, and duration. It reported that such interventions can improve aspects of caregiver well-being, such as confidence, depression, and self-efficacy, if they have multiple components and are tailored to the individual.

Study details

How this study scored 63/100
How this study's score is builtJournal tier 7 of 10; Journal's citation record 2 of 4; Study design 12 of 12; Strength of evidence 5 of 5; Peer-review validation 10 of 10; How recent 1 of 5; Sample size 0 of 4; Effect reported 0 of 3; Studied in people 0 of 3; Randomised / blinded 0 of 2; Times cited 6 of 7; Citations per year 4 of 5; Impact for its field and year 2 of 6; Cited by studies here 3 of 6; Still being cited 3 of 4; Senior author's track record 4 of 4; Institution's track record 1 of 3; Multi-centre collaboration 1 of 3; Indexed in PubMed 2 of 2; Free to read 0 of 2. Total 63 of 100.63 of 100 points earned37 not earned

Published in a peer-reviewed journal, and it is a systematic review of all the studies on the question. Scored zero for sample size, effect reported and studied in people because the record does not state it.

ComponentPointsWhy
Journal tier 7 / 10 Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (International journal of geriatric psychiatry)
Journal's citation record 2 / 4 International Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry: journal h-index 190 (OpenAlex, 2026-10-29)
Study design 12 / 12 A systematic review of all the studies on the question (from PubMed type “Systematic Review”)
Strength of evidence 5 / 5 Rated “high” in our summary
Peer-review validation 10 / 10 Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal.
How recent 1 / 5 2014 — within 20 year(s) of the newest study here
Sample size 0 / 4 Participant count not stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Effect reported 0 / 3 No effect size reported — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Studied in people 0 / 3 Not stated whether this was studied in people — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Randomised / blinded 0 / 2 A review of other studies — randomisation is not credited here
Times cited 6 / 7 Cited 450 times (OpenAlex, 2026-10-10)
Citations per year 4 / 5 32.1 citations a year over 14 year(s) since 2014
Impact for its field and year 2 / 6 Cited 2.5× the average for papers of its field and year (OpenAlex FWCI)
Cited by studies here 3 / 6 Cited by 27 other studies in this library
Still being cited 3 / 4 Cited 81 times in 2024–2026 (2026 still in progress; OpenAlex)
Senior author's track record 4 / 4 Last-listed author Frans R.J. Verhey: h-index 111 (OpenAlex, whole career)
Institution's track record 1 / 3 Maastricht University: institution h-index 876 (OpenAlex)
Multi-centre collaboration 1 / 3 OpenAlex lists 2 institution(s) in 1 country
Indexed in PubMed 2 / 2 Indexed in PubMed (PMID 23963684)
Free to read 0 / 2 Behind a paywall — scores zero
Total 63 / 100 —

What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →

Read the original

Full text: free to read — OpenAlex lists this copy as free to read: the link above (checked 6 Feb 1020).

Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris

Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. Check the citation against the original before you use it.

APA 7th

Boots, L. M., de Vugt, M. E., van Knippenberg, R. J., Kempen, G. I., & Verhey, F. R. (2014). A systematic review of Internet-based supportive interventions for caregivers of patients with dementia. International journal of geriatric psychiatry. https://doi.org/10.1002/gps.4016

Vancouver

Boots LM, de Vugt ME, van Knippenberg RJ, Kempen GI, Verhey FR. A systematic review of Internet-based supportive interventions for caregivers of patients with dementia. International journal of geriatric psychiatry. 2014. doi:10.1002/gps.4016. PMID: 23963684.

BibTeX

@article{boots2014-23963684,
  author  = {Boots, L. M. and de Vugt, M. E. and van Knippenberg, R. J. and Kempen, G. I. and Verhey, F. R.},
  title   = {{A systematic review of Internet-based supportive interventions for caregivers of patients with dementia}},
  journal = {International journal of geriatric psychiatry},
  year    = {2014},
  doi     = {10.1002/gps.4016},
  pmid    = {23963684},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.1002/gps.4016}
}

Studies this one cites

Referenced by this study and also in the alzhub library, so you can read them here.

Later studies that cite this one

27 studies in the alzhub library list this one in their references. Showing the 8 highest-scoring.

Related studies in Caregiving

Also tagged “care”

996 studies in the library carry the topic tag “care”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 996 tagged studies.

Similar studies

More on Caregiving

See all studies in Caregiving →