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 62 out of 100. Caregiving

Topic: Risk, prevention and care in population studies

Background and objectives Caring for a person with dementia places a significant burden upon informal caregivers and leads to decreased psychological and physical health, which is why dementia caregiver interventions have been developed. However, empirical evidence for the efficacy of those interventions is inconclusive and the last comprehensive meta-analysis (Pinquart & Sörensen. Helping caregivers of persons with dementia: Which interventions work and how large are their effects? International Psychogeriatrics. 2006;18(4), 577-595.) was published more than 10 years ago. Research design and method This meta-analysis aims to update the meta-analysis conducted by Pinquart and Sörensen. Based on a systematic search in electronic data bases, effects of 282 controlled studies were integrated. The effectiveness of different intervention types and influences of study characteristics were evaluated. Results Interventions had, on average, a significant, small-to-moderate effect on the improvement of ability/knowledge, subjective well-being, burden, depression, and the caregiver's anxiety as well as symptoms of the care recipient. No mean effect was found in regard to reducing the risk of institutionalization. Most intervention types had an effect on the reduction of burden as well as on other outcomes. Psychoeducation and multicomponent interventions affected most outcomes, whereas the efficacy of other intervention types was domain-specific. Discussion and implications There is evidence for the efficacy of dementia caregiver interventions, though due to having predominantly small effect sizes, there is still room for improvement. Interventions should be tailored to the desired outcome. More research on long-term effects, effects on anxiety and institutionalization, efficacy of respite and support interventions, care recipient training, and the intervention process is needed.

Key findings

Why it matters

This meta-analysis of 282 controlled studies found that dementia caregiver interventions had small-to-moderate effects on ability and knowledge, subjective well-being, burden, depression, caregiver anxiety, and care recipient symptoms. No mean effect was found for reducing the risk of institutionalization.

Study details

How this study scored 62/100
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 5 of 7; Citations per year 4 of 5; Impact for its field and year 4 of 6; Cited by studies here 3 of 6; Still being cited 3 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 62 of 100.62 of 100 points earned38 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 Gerontologist)
Journal's citation record 2 / 4 The Gerontologist: journal h-index 238 (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 2020 — 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 5 / 7 Cited 229 times (OpenAlex, 2026-10-10)
Citations per year 4 / 5 28.6 citations a year over 8 year(s) since 2020
Impact for its field and year 4 / 6 Cited 9.5× the average for papers of its field and year (OpenAlex FWCI)
Cited by studies here 3 / 6 Cited by 15 other studies in this library
Still being cited 3 / 4 Cited 135 times in 2024–2026 (2026 still in progress; OpenAlex)
Senior author's track record 3 / 4 Last-listed author Martin Pinquart: h-index 74 (OpenAlex, whole career)
Institution's track record 0 / 3 Philipps University of Marburg: institution h-index 653 (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 33226434)
Free to read 0 / 2 Behind a paywall — scores zero
Total 62 / 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

Walter, E., & Pinquart, M. (2020). How Effective Are Dementia Caregiver Interventions? An Updated Comprehensive Meta-Analysis. The Gerontologist. https://doi.org/10.1093/geront/gnz118

Vancouver

Walter E, Pinquart M. How Effective Are Dementia Caregiver Interventions? An Updated Comprehensive Meta-Analysis. The Gerontologist. 2020. doi:10.1093/geront/gnz118. PMID: 33226434.

BibTeX

@article{walter2020-33226434,
  author  = {Walter, E. and Pinquart, M.},
  title   = {{How Effective Are Dementia Caregiver Interventions? An Updated Comprehensive Meta-Analysis}},
  journal = {The Gerontologist},
  year    = {2020},
  doi     = {10.1093/geront/gnz118},
  pmid    = {33226434},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.1093/geront/gnz118}
}

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

15 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 →