Home › Research › Caregiving
Dyadic construction of dementia: meta-ethnography and behaviour-process synthesis
Alessandro Bosco, Justine Schneider, Donna Maria Coleston-Shields, Lidia Sousa, Martin Orrell. Aging & mental health, 2018-03-15
Topic: Health services, long-term care and technology
Seventeen studies were included in the review. The meta-ethnography generated two third-order constructs: Personal orientation and noises. When people with dementia and their carers have dyadic-oriented goals, their behavioural responses may promote positive interaction. When only one partner has dyadic goals, context-related stress may affect the interaction, because of no perceived shared understanding of the situation. Our findings suggest that unequal power distribution within dyads, can cause significant stress, when coping strategies are impaired. We discussed implications for family carers, people with dementia, and health professionals deriving from greater understanding of dyadic dynamics to care.
Key findings
- Seventeen studies were included in the review.
- The meta-ethnography generated two third-order constructs: Personal orientation and noises.
- When people with dementia and their carers have dyadic-oriented goals, their behavioural responses may promote positive interaction.
- When only one partner has dyadic goals, context-related stress may affect the interaction, because of no perceived shared understanding of the situation.
- Our findings suggest that unequal power distribution within dyads, can cause significant stress, when coping strategies are impaired.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Caregiving →
Study details
- Evidence strengthLow
How this study scored 61/100
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. We have no data on journal's citation record, times cited, citations per year, impact for its field and year, cited by studies here, still being cited, senior author's track record, institution's track record, multi-centre collaboration and free to read, so those were left out: it earned 34 of the 56 points we could judge it on, which is 61 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Aging & mental health) |
| Journal's citation record | — / 4 | No journal record from OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Study design | 12 / 12 | A systematic review of all the studies on the question (from PubMed type “Systematic Review”) |
| Strength of evidence | 1 / 5 | Rated “low” in our summary |
| Peer-review validation | 10 / 10 | Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal. |
| How recent | 2 / 5 | 2019 — within 10 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 | — / 7 | No citation count (not found in OpenAlex) — left out of this score |
| Citations per year | — / 5 | No citation count or no year — left out of this score |
| Impact for its field and year | — / 6 | No field-weighted citation impact (OpenAlex has none yet) — left out of this score |
| Cited by studies here | — / 6 | Not yet checked against this library's citation graph — left out of this score |
| Still being cited | — / 4 | No yearly citation counts — left out of this score |
| Senior author's track record | — / 4 | Senior author's record not available — left out of this score |
| Institution's track record | — / 3 | No institution listed in OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Multi-centre collaboration | — / 3 | Institutions not listed — left out of this score |
| Indexed in PubMed | 2 / 2 | Indexed in PubMed (PMID 29543501) |
| Free to read | — / 2 | Access not recorded — left out of this score |
| Points | 34 / 56 | Scored on 10 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 34 of the 56 points we could judge it on is 61 out of 100. |
| Total | 61 / 100 | — |
What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →
Read the original
Free copy unknown: no free-copy check has an answer for this record yet. That does not mean it is paywalled.
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
Bosco, A., Schneider, J., Coleston-Shields, D. M., Sousa, L., & Orrell, M. (2019). Dyadic construction of dementia: meta-ethnography and behaviour-process synthesis. Aging & mental health. https://doi.org/10.1080/13607863.2018.1450836
Vancouver
Bosco A, Schneider J, Coleston-Shields DM, Sousa L, Orrell M. Dyadic construction of dementia: meta-ethnography and behaviour-process synthesis. Aging & mental health. 2019. doi:10.1080/13607863.2018.1450836. PMID: 29543501.
BibTeX
@article{bosco2019-29543501,
author = {Bosco, Alessandro and Schneider, Justine and Coleston-Shields, Donna Maria and Sousa, Lidia and Orrell, Martin},
title = {{Dyadic construction of dementia: meta-ethnography and behaviour-process synthesis}},
journal = {Aging \& mental health},
year = {2019},
doi = {10.1080/13607863.2018.1450836},
pmid = {29543501},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1080/13607863.2018.1450836}
}
Related studies in Caregiving
Also tagged “caregiver”
195 studies in the library carry the topic tag “caregiver”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 195 tagged studies.