ArticlePloS one2026
Measuring and valuing spillover effects in caregivers and families: A scoping review.
Article in PloS one, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesAs healthcare increasingly relies on informal care for chronic and complex conditions, economic evaluations have expanded beyond patient outcomes to consider spillover effects on caregivers and families. This scoping review aimed to map existing measures and methods for assessing these effects and to identify potential mechanisms, mediators, and moderators to inform future survey design.
methodsWe conducted a comprehensive search of four databases (PubMed, APA PsycInfo, CINAHL Complete, and EconLit) for English-language studies published from 2017 to 2025, including quantitative, qualitative, and mixed-methods research reporting monetary or non-monetary spillovers. Screening and study selection followed the Participants, Concept, Context framework and were reported according to PRISMA-ScR guidelines.
resultsA total of 141 studies met the inclusion criteria. Incorporating caregiver and family spillovers could meaningfully alter cost-effectiveness estimates, but this practice remained inconsistent due to limited data and methodological variability. Comprehensive assessment of spillover effects benefited from combining generic, caregiver-specific, and disease-specific tools to capture both perceived and measurable impacts. Valuation of societal and economic spillovers, including informal care time, costs, productivity loss, and wellbeing impact, was influenced by methodological choices, caregiver and patient characteristics, and caregiving context, highlighting the need for flexible, context-sensitive approaches. Caregiver outcomes reflected the interplay of mediating factors (psychological, social, relational) and moderating influences (coping, spirituality, support systems, caregiving intensity). Subjective caregiver burden was pivotal, shaping and conditioning the effects of caregiving stressors on wellbeing.
conclusionEstablishing consensus on best-practice approaches for incorporating spillover effects in economic evaluations is needed to accurately quantify their impact on caregivers and families and to inform interventions that reduce caregiver burden.
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.