Trial reportPloS one2024
Care-related quality of life of informal caregivers of stroke survivors: Cross-sectional analysis of a randomized clinical trial.
Trial report in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Care-Related Quality of Life of Caregivers for Patients With Low Vision and Blindness: A Cross-Sectional Study.Journal of ophthalmology · 2026Article
- Quality of life of informal caregivers 50 years old and older in Spain by household living status: a descriptive study.Scientific reports · 2025Observational
- An Exploration of the Experiences of Informal Caregivers of Stroke Patients in Saudi Arabia; A Qualitative Study.SAGE open nursingArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeWe aimed to describe the intensity of care and its consequences on informal caregivers of stroke survivors according to the degree of care receivers' functional dependence for activities of daily living; and to identify the factors associated with caregivers' care-related quality of life.
methodsCross-sectional analysis of prospective data collected in a cost-utility study alongside the RACECAT trial in Catalonia (Spain). One-hundred and thirty-two care receiver-caregiver pairs were interviewed six months after stroke. Functional dependence for activities of daily living was measured with the Barthel index. We assessed caregivers care-related quality of life with the CarerQoL, which measures seven dimensions of subjective burden (CarerQoL-7D) and a happiness score (CarerQoL-VAS). We evaluated the association between characteristics of informal caregivers, characteristics of care receivers, and intensity of care, and the caregiver's care-related quality of life (subjective burden and happiness) in a hypothesized model using a structural equation model.
resultsOf the 132 caregivers, 74,2% were women with an average age of 59.4 ± 12.5 years. The 56.8% of them were spouses. The care intensity ranged from a mean of 24h/week for mild to 40h/week for severe dependence. Most caregivers (76.3%) were satisfied with their task, regardless of dependence, but showed increasing problems in caring for severely dependent persons. Being a woman (coeff. -0.23; 95%CI: -0.40, -0.07), spending more time in care tasks (coeff -0.37; -0.53, -0.21) and care receiver need of constant supervision (coeff 0.31; -0.47, -0.14) were associated with higher burden of care, irrespective of the degree of dependence. Caregiver burden (coeff 0.46; 0.30-0.61) and care receiver anxiety or depression (coeff -0.19; -0.34, -0.03) were associated with lower caregiver happiness.
conclusionsThe findings suggest the importance of developing mainly two types of support interventions for caregivers: respite and psychosocial support. Especially for women with high caring burden and/or caring for persons with high levels of anxiety or depression.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.