Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39414751›Full record

SynthesisClinical child and family psychology review2025

Siblings of Persons with Disabilities: A Systematic Integrative Review of the Empirical Literature.

Annalisa Levante, Chiara Martis, Cristina Maria Del Prete, Paola Martino, Patrizia Primiceri, Flavia Lecciso

Erratum issuedAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Clinical child and family psychology review, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. The Reaction to Diagnosis Questionnaire-Sibling Version: A Preliminary Study on the Psychometric Properties.European journal of investigation in health, psychology and education · 2025
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Annalisa LevanteDepartment of Human and Social Sciences, University of Salento, Via di Valesio, 73100, Lecce, Italy. annalisa.levante@unisalento.it.ORCID 0000-0002-3250-3839
Chiara MartisDepartment of Human and Social Sciences, University of Salento, Via di Valesio, 73100, Lecce, Italy.
Cristina Maria Del PreteDistrict of Rehabilitation, Local Health Service, 73100, P.zza Bottazzi, Lecce, Italy.
Paola MartinoOffice for Inclusion of Individuals with Disability, University of Salento, Via di Valesio, 73100, Lecce, Italy.
Patrizia PrimiceriDistrict of Rehabilitation, Local Health Service, 73100, P.zza Bottazzi, Lecce, Italy.
Flavia LeccisoDepartment of Human and Social Sciences, University of Salento, Via di Valesio, 73100, Lecce, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The systematic review aimed to systematize the empirical literature on the psychological impact of disability on the siblings of persons with disabilities, to inform research and provide clinical recommendations. Two research questions addressed the review: (1) What are the main psychological constructs investigated in siblings of persons with disability? (2) What is the main role of each psychological construct in siblings of persons with disability experience? The electronic search was conducted in 7 databases and the PRISMA diagram was used. The inclusion criteria were: Papers published in English and in peer-reviewed journals; papers published between January 2014 and June 2024; qualitative, quantitative, and mixed studies; and papers on the psychological impact of disabilities and/or chronic illnesses on the experience of siblings of persons with disabilities. The standardized Mixed Method Appraisal Tool protocol was used to appraise the methodological quality of the studies. To summarize the findings, a narrative approach was adopted. A total of 60 studies have been reviewed. According to the methodological quality appraisal of studies, most of them reported a high (n = 45) and medium (n = 15) quality. They involved 10,146 participants. Findings revealed that sibling relationships, sibling-focused parentification, and emotional/behavioral adjustment are the main psychological constructs investigated by existing literature. Few studies focused on siblings' well-being. Studies exploring more than a psychological construct were included as a hybrid. Only one study examined the siblings' psychological experience during the COVID-19 pandemic. The quality of the sibling relationship ranged from good to poor; the caregiver is the main role played by siblings of persons with disabilities; anxiety, depression, and aggressive behaviors are the main emotional/behavioral symptoms revealed. Most studies (n = 39) recruited participants with brothers or sisters with mental disorders. The findings of this systematic review may play a role in the clinical field, as they might help to design gender- and age-specific intervention programs.

Indexed as

Persons with DisabilitiesSibling RelationsSiblingsHumansDisabilityEmotional/behavioral adjustmentParentificationSiblingSibling relationshipSystematic integrative reviewWell-being

Identifiers

PMID39414751
PMCPMC11885339

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.