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 56 out of 100. Disparities

Topic: Risk, prevention and care in population studies

Objective The aim of this study was to estimate the efficacy of technology-based interventions for informal caregivers of people with dementia (PWD). Methods PubMed, PsycINFO, and Cochrane Library databases were searched in August 2018, with no restrictions in language or publication date. Two independent reviewers identified 33 eligible randomized controlled trials (RCTs) conducting a technology-based intervention for informal carers of PWD. Meta-analyses for the outcome measures caregiver depression and caregiver burden were conducted with subgroup analyses according to mode of delivery (telephone, computer/web-based, combined interventions). To assess methodologic quality, the Cochrane risk-of-bias assessment was rated. Results Meta-analyses revealed a small but significant postintervention effect of technology-based interventions for caregiver depression and caregiver burden. Combined interventions showed the strongest effects. Conclusion Technology-based interventions have the potential to support informal caregivers of PWD. Because of advantages such as high flexibility and availability, technology-based interventions provide a promising alternative compared with "traditional services," e.g., those for people living in rural areas. More high-quality RCTs for specific caregiver groups are needed.

Key findings

Why it matters

This meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials found that technology-based interventions had a small but significant effect on caregiver depression and burden. It supports caregivers of people with dementia but does not treat, cure or prevent the disease itself.

Study details

How this study scored 56/100
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 2 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 4 of 7; Citations per year 3 of 5; Impact for its field and year 2 of 6; Cited by studies here 2 of 6; Still being cited 2 of 4; Senior author's track record 3 of 4; Institution's track record 0 of 3; Multi-centre collaboration 0 of 3; Indexed in PubMed 2 of 2; Free to read 0 of 2. Total 56 of 100.56 of 100 points earned44 not earned

Published in a peer-reviewed journal, and it is a meta-analysis pooling many studies. 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 (The American journal of geriatric psychiatry : official journal of the American Association for Geriatric Psychiatry)
Journal's citation record 2 / 4 American Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry: journal h-index 178 (OpenAlex, 2026-10-29)
Study design 12 / 12 A meta-analysis pooling many studies
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 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 4 / 7 Cited 84 times (OpenAlex, 2026-10-10)
Citations per year 3 / 5 9.3 citations a year over 9 year(s) since 2019
Impact for its field and year 2 / 6 Cited 1.1× the average for papers of its field and year (OpenAlex FWCI)
Cited by studies here 2 / 6 Cited by 6 other studies in this library
Still being cited 2 / 4 Cited 29 times in 2024–2026 (2026 still in progress; OpenAlex)
Senior author's track record 3 / 4 Last-listed author Michael A. Rapp: h-index 58 (OpenAlex, whole career)
Institution's track record 0 / 3 University of Potsdam: institution h-index 485 (OpenAlex)
Multi-centre collaboration 0 / 3 OpenAlex lists 1 institution(s) in 1 country — scores zero (affiliation lists can be incomplete)
Indexed in PubMed 2 / 2 Indexed in PubMed (PMID 30642650)
Free to read 0 / 2 Behind a paywall — scores zero
Total 56 / 100 —

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

Read the original

May need a subscription OpenAlex found no free copy of the full text (checked 6 Feb 1020), so the publisher may charge for it. The PubMed abstract is free.

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

Deeken, F., Rezo, A., Hinz, M., Discher, R., & Rapp, M. A. (2019). Evaluation of Technology-Based Interventions for Informal Caregivers of Patients With Dementia-A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials. The American journal of geriatric psychiatry : official journal of the American Association for Geriatric Psychiatry. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jagp.2018.12.003

Vancouver

Deeken F, Rezo A, Hinz M, Discher R, Rapp MA. Evaluation of Technology-Based Interventions for Informal Caregivers of Patients With Dementia-A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials. The American journal of geriatric psychiatry : official journal of the American Association for Geriatric Psychiatry. 2019. doi:10.1016/j.jagp.2018.12.003. PMID: 30642650.

BibTeX

@article{deeken2019-30642650,
  author  = {Deeken, F. and Rezo, A. and Hinz, M. and Discher, R. and Rapp, M. A.},
  title   = {{Evaluation of Technology-Based Interventions for Informal Caregivers of Patients With Dementia-A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials}},
  journal = {The American journal of geriatric psychiatry : official journal of the American Association for Geriatric Psychiatry},
  year    = {2019},
  doi     = {10.1016/j.jagp.2018.12.003},
  pmid    = {30642650},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jagp.2018.12.003}
}

Studies this one cites

Referenced by this study and also in the alzhub library, so you can read them here. Showing 12 of 14.

Later studies that cite this one

6 studies in the alzhub library list this one in their references.

Related studies in Disparities

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 Disparities

See all studies in Disparities →