Home › Research › Cognitive tests and assessment
Usability, Acceptability, and Preliminary Effectiveness of a Peer-Delivered and Technology-Supported Mental Health Intervention for Family Caregivers of People With Dementia: Field Usability Study
Collins-Pisano C, Leggett AN, Gambee D, Fortuna KL.. JMIR human factors, 2024-05-27
Topic: Risk, prevention and care in population studies
Background Family caregivers of people with dementia are critical to the quality of life of care recipients and the sustainability of health care systems but face an increased risk of emotional distress and negative physical and mental health outcomes. Objective The purpose of this study was to examine the usability, acceptability, and preliminary effectiveness of a technology-based and caregiver-delivered peer support program, the Caregiver Remote Education and Support (CARES) smartphone or tablet app. Methods A total of 9 adult family caregivers of people with dementia received the CARES intervention, and 3 former family caregivers of people with dementia were trained to deliver it. Quantitative data were collected at baseline and at the end of the 2-week field usability study. Qualitative data were also collected at the end of the 2-week field usability study. Results The field usability study demonstrated that a 2-week peer-delivered and technology-supported mental health intervention designed to improve burden, stress, and strain levels was experienced by former and current family caregivers of people with dementia as acceptable. Current family caregivers rated CARES as above average in usability, whereas the caregiver peer supporters rated CARES as marginally usable. CARES was associated with non-statistically significant improvements in burden, stress, and strain levels. Conclusions This field usability study demonstrated that it is possible to train former family caregivers of people with dementia to use technology to deliver a mental health intervention to current family caregivers of people with dementia. Future studies would benefit from a longer trial; a larger sample size; a randomized controlled design; and a control of covariables such as stages of dementia, years providing care, and severity of dementia symptoms.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Collins-Pisano, C., Leggett, A. N., Gambee, D., & Fortuna, K. L. (2024). Usability, Acceptability, and Preliminary Effectiveness of a Peer-Delivered and Technology-Supported Mental Health Intervention for Family Caregivers of People With Dementia: Field Usability Study. JMIR human factors. https://doi.org/10.2196/41202
Vancouver
Collins-Pisano C, Leggett AN, Gambee D, Fortuna KL. Usability, Acceptability, and Preliminary Effectiveness of a Peer-Delivered and Technology-Supported Mental Health Intervention for Family Caregivers of People With Dementia: Field Usability Study. JMIR human factors. 2024. doi:10.2196/41202. PMID: 38801660.
BibTeX
@article{collinspisano2024-38801660,
author = {Collins-Pisano, C. and Leggett, A. N. and Gambee, D. and Fortuna, K. L.},
title = {{Usability, Acceptability, and Preliminary Effectiveness of a Peer-Delivered and Technology-Supported Mental Health Intervention for Family Caregivers of People With Dementia: Field Usability Study}},
journal = {JMIR human factors},
year = {2024},
doi = {10.2196/41202},
pmid = {38801660},
url = {https://doi.org/10.2196/41202}
}
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.
Key findings
- Background Family caregivers of people with dementia are critical to the quality of life of care recipients and the sustainability of health care systems but face an increased risk of emotional distress and negative physical and mental health outcomes.
- Results The field usability study demonstrated that a 2-week peer-delivered and technology-supported mental health intervention designed to improve burden, stress, and strain levels was experienced by former and current family caregivers of people with dementia as acceptable.
- CARES was associated with non-statistically significant improvements in burden, stress, and strain levels.
- Conclusions This field usability study demonstrated that it is possible to train former family caregivers of people with dementia to use technology to deliver a mental health intervention to current family caregivers of people with dementia.
Study details
- Evidence strengthHigh
How this study scored 52/100
Published in a peer-reviewed journal. Scored zero for study design, sample size, effect reported, studied in people and randomised / blinded 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 and multi-centre collaboration, so those were left out: it earned 30 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 52 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (JMIR human factors) |
| Journal's citation record | — / 4 | No journal record from OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Study design | 0 / 12 | No study design recorded — scores zero, not guessed (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| 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 | 4 / 5 | 2024 — within 3 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 | No randomisation or blinding stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| 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 38801660) |
| Free to read | 2 / 2 | Free to read |
| Points | 30 / 58 | Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 30 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 52 out of 100. |
| Total | 52 / 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.
Related studies in Cognitive tests and assessment
Also tagged “effectiveness”
3 studies in the library carry the topic tag “effectiveness”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 3 tagged studies.