ArticleBritish journal of health psychology2025
Online support groups for family caregivers: A qualitative exploration of social support and engagement.
Article in British journal of health psychology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Dynamics of Digital Support Platform Use Among Family Caregivers of Children With Disabilities: Longitudinal Study.JMIR mHealth and uHealth · 2026Article
- Online interventions for dementia caregiver burden and self-efficacy: A systematic review and meta-analysis.International journal of nursing studies advances · 2026Review
- A quantitative study of social identity, social support and perceived stress in online support groups for family caregivers.Journal of health psychology · 2026Article
- Choice, struggle, and resilience: the experience of pre-loss grief among Chinese family caregivers of cancer patients.BMC palliative care · 2025Article
- Online support groups for family caregivers: A qualitative exploration of social support and engagement.British journal of health psychology · 2025Article
- Implementation and Evaluation of Peer Ambassador Support to Patients Newly Diagnosed With Hematological Cancer and Their Caregivers.Nursing research and practice · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThis qualitative research explored family caregivers' engagement and social support in a single online support group (OSG). It sought to answer two research questions: Q1: Was social support evident in the OSG? If so what types and how did these types relate to engagement? Q2: Were elements from the Context, Content and Delivery conceptual framework evident in the OSG? If so, what were the key elements of this group?
methodsEighteen semi-structured interviews were carried out with members of a family caregiver OSG in Ireland. Data were analysed using deductive qualitative analysis with a codebook created from one typology of social support and the Context, Content and Delivery conceptual framework for engagement in web-based technologies.
findingsFor Q1, all types of social support were generated in the OSG. All had a positive impact on engagement. Informational support (17/18 respondents) and emotional support (15/18 respondents) were the highest support experienced by the group. For Q2, we found evidence for 11 key elements of the conceptual framework. Myriad sub-elements had positive, negative and mixed impacts on engagement. These elements generally related to positive developments of social support by the respondents.
conclusionDrawing together the findings, we present a new framework, the Journey of Engagement and Support in Online Support Groups for Family Caregivers. This maps the stages for engagement and support in an OSG and can be used by practitioners for running OSG and researchers to generate testable hypotheses about the relationship between social support and engagement.
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.