家庭照顾者感知到的社会支持与获得的社会支持之间的关系:系统综述与元分析》。

IF 2.4 Q1 NURSING Nursing Reports Pub Date : 2024-11-12 DOI:10.3390/nursrep14040252
Belén Gutiérrez-Sánchez, Catalina López-Martínez, Henrique da-Silva-Domingues, Rafael Del-Pino-Casado
{"title":"家庭照顾者感知到的社会支持与获得的社会支持之间的关系:系统综述与元分析》。","authors":"Belén Gutiérrez-Sánchez, Catalina López-Martínez, Henrique da-Silva-Domingues, Rafael Del-Pino-Casado","doi":"10.3390/nursrep14040252","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Background:</b> The care of dependent people is eminently family-oriented, and often, there is a high level of dedication to this family care. Constant and continuous care leads to a series of negative psychological consequences. Social support has been related to improved mental health in family caregivers. We found heterogeneous results regarding the relationship between the types of social support received and the perceived level of support. In addition, to our knowledge, no reviews analyse this relationship among family caregivers. <b>Objectives</b>: Therefore, we objective to systematically synthesise the relationships between perceived and received social support in informal caregivers. <b>Methodology</b>: We have carried out a quantitative systematic review with a meta-analysis, registered in PROSPERO (id: CRD42023470047); the systematic search was carried out in the following databases: PubMed, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and Scopus, until November 2023. After the selection and review of the results, twelve studies were obtained, two of which were eliminated due to a high risk of classification bias. <b>Results</b>: Regarding the results, a medium-size positive statistical association was found (r = 0.43). The results were consistent, accurate, and robust. The Trim and Fill test showed a variation of 7%. Subgroup analysis indicated no differences in the age group of the people cared for (adults or children), selection bias, and confounding bias. <b>Conclusions</b>: In conclusions, perceived social support is related to more social support received by family caregivers.</p>","PeriodicalId":40753,"journal":{"name":"Nursing Reports","volume":"14 4","pages":"3466-3475"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11587471/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Relationship Between Perceived and Received Social Support in Family Caregivers: A Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Belén Gutiérrez-Sánchez, Catalina López-Martínez, Henrique da-Silva-Domingues, Rafael Del-Pino-Casado\",\"doi\":\"10.3390/nursrep14040252\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p><b>Background:</b> The care of dependent people is eminently family-oriented, and often, there is a high level of dedication to this family care. Constant and continuous care leads to a series of negative psychological consequences. Social support has been related to improved mental health in family caregivers. We found heterogeneous results regarding the relationship between the types of social support received and the perceived level of support. In addition, to our knowledge, no reviews analyse this relationship among family caregivers. <b>Objectives</b>: Therefore, we objective to systematically synthesise the relationships between perceived and received social support in informal caregivers. <b>Methodology</b>: We have carried out a quantitative systematic review with a meta-analysis, registered in PROSPERO (id: CRD42023470047); the systematic search was carried out in the following databases: PubMed, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and Scopus, until November 2023. After the selection and review of the results, twelve studies were obtained, two of which were eliminated due to a high risk of classification bias. <b>Results</b>: Regarding the results, a medium-size positive statistical association was found (r = 0.43). The results were consistent, accurate, and robust. The Trim and Fill test showed a variation of 7%. Subgroup analysis indicated no differences in the age group of the people cared for (adults or children), selection bias, and confounding bias. <b>Conclusions</b>: In conclusions, perceived social support is related to more social support received by family caregivers.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":40753,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Nursing Reports\",\"volume\":\"14 4\",\"pages\":\"3466-3475\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-12\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11587471/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Nursing Reports\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3390/nursrep14040252\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"NURSING\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Nursing Reports","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/nursrep14040252","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"NURSING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:对受扶养人的照顾显然是以家庭为导向的,而这种家庭照顾往往需要高度的奉献精神。持续不断的照顾会导致一系列负面的心理后果。社会支持与改善家庭照顾者的心理健康有关。我们发现,关于所获得的社会支持类型与所感知的支持水平之间的关系,结果各不相同。此外,据我们所知,还没有综述对家庭照顾者之间的这种关系进行分析。我们的目标因此,我们旨在系统地总结非正式照顾者感知到的社会支持与获得的社会支持之间的关系。研究方法我们在 PROSPERO(id:CRD42023470047)上注册了一项带有荟萃分析的定量系统性综述;在以下数据库中进行了系统性检索:在以下数据库中进行了系统检索:PubMed、CINAHL、PsycINFO 和 Scopus,检索期至 2023 年 11 月。经过筛选和审查,共获得 12 项研究结果,其中两项因分类偏倚风险较高而被剔除。研究结果结果发现,两者之间存在中等程度的正相关统计关系(r = 0.43)。结果一致、准确、稳健。修剪和填充测试显示差异为 7%。分组分析表明,被护理者的年龄组(成人或儿童)、选择偏差和混杂偏差均无差异。结论总之,感知到的社会支持与家庭照顾者获得的更多社会支持有关。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Relationship Between Perceived and Received Social Support in Family Caregivers: A Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis.

Background: The care of dependent people is eminently family-oriented, and often, there is a high level of dedication to this family care. Constant and continuous care leads to a series of negative psychological consequences. Social support has been related to improved mental health in family caregivers. We found heterogeneous results regarding the relationship between the types of social support received and the perceived level of support. In addition, to our knowledge, no reviews analyse this relationship among family caregivers. Objectives: Therefore, we objective to systematically synthesise the relationships between perceived and received social support in informal caregivers. Methodology: We have carried out a quantitative systematic review with a meta-analysis, registered in PROSPERO (id: CRD42023470047); the systematic search was carried out in the following databases: PubMed, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and Scopus, until November 2023. After the selection and review of the results, twelve studies were obtained, two of which were eliminated due to a high risk of classification bias. Results: Regarding the results, a medium-size positive statistical association was found (r = 0.43). The results were consistent, accurate, and robust. The Trim and Fill test showed a variation of 7%. Subgroup analysis indicated no differences in the age group of the people cared for (adults or children), selection bias, and confounding bias. Conclusions: In conclusions, perceived social support is related to more social support received by family caregivers.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Nursing Reports
Nursing Reports NURSING-
CiteScore
2.50
自引率
4.20%
发文量
78
期刊介绍: Nursing Reports is an open access, peer-reviewed, online-only journal that aims to influence the art and science of nursing by making rigorously conducted research accessible and understood to the full spectrum of practicing nurses, academics, educators and interested members of the public. The journal represents an exhilarating opportunity to make a unique and significant contribution to nursing and the wider community by addressing topics, theories and issues that concern the whole field of Nursing Science, including research, practice, policy and education. The primary intent of the journal is to present scientifically sound and influential empirical and theoretical studies, critical reviews and open debates to the global community of nurses. Short reports, opinions and insight into the plight of nurses the world-over will provide a voice for those of all cultures, governments and perspectives. The emphasis of Nursing Reports will be on ensuring that the highest quality of evidence and contribution is made available to the greatest number of nurses. Nursing Reports aims to make original, evidence-based, peer-reviewed research available to the global community of nurses and to interested members of the public. In addition, reviews of the literature, open debates on professional issues and short reports from around the world are invited to contribute to our vibrant and dynamic journal. All published work will adhere to the most stringent ethical standards and journalistic principles of fairness, worth and credibility. Our journal publishes Editorials, Original Articles, Review articles, Critical Debates, Short Reports from Around the Globe and Letters to the Editor.
期刊最新文献
Changes in Patient Safety Knowledge During Undergraduate Nursing Education: A Scoping Review Protocol. Validation of the Santa Clara Ethics Scale (SCES) in Nursing Students: The Role of Ethics as a Protector of Student Compassion. Prognostic Scores for Acute Kidney Injury in Critically Ill Patients. Increasing Access to Palliative Care in Cameroon: Progress, Gaps, and Recommendations. Electronic Nursing Records: Importance for Nursing and Benefits of Implementation in Health Information Systems-A Scoping Review.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1