Cited by 207Family Support in IllnessFamily and Disability Support ResearchNursing care and research

Psychological interventions for parents of children and adolescents with chronic illness

Open access
Law, Emily, Fisher, Emma, Eccleston, Christopher, Palermo, Tonya M·2019·Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Abstract

Psychological interventions for parents of children and adolescents with chronic illness (Review)

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/14651858.cd009660.pub4

Cites

243 of 243 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • A recent review found that psychological interventions improved parent mental health across a chronic illness sample, including parents of children with chronic pain.

    “Furthermore, a recent review [99] found that psychological interventions also improved parent mental health across a chronic illness sample, including parents of children with chronic pain.”

    From Best-evidence for the rehabilitation of chronic pain part 1: Pediatric pain (2019) · cites this paper as [99]

    The 'Combined psychological therapies for each illness condition' section reports improved parent mental health for parents of children with chronic pain. But the 'Individual psychological therapies for combined illness conditions' section finds a benefit for problem-solving therapy, not cognitive-behavioral therapy. The claim overgeneralizes the improvement to psychological interventions across the chronic-illness sample. (LLM, conf=0.87)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 6

  1. Deeks JJ, Higgins JPT, Altman DG (editors) on behalf of the Cochrane Statistical Methods Group. Chapter 9: Analysing data and undertaking meta-analyses. In: Higgins JPT, Churchill R, Chandler J, Cumpston MS (editors), Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions version 5.2.0 (updated June 2017), Cochrane, 2017. Available from www.training.cochrane.org/handbook.
  2. Higgins 2011a Higgins JP, Deeks JJ, Altman DG (editors). Chapter 16: Special topics in statistics. In: Higgins JPT, Green S (editors), Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.1.0 (updated March 2011). The Cochrane Collaboration, 2011. Available from www.handbook.cochrane.org.
  3. Higgins 2011b Higgins JP, Deeks JJ (editors). Chapter 7: Selecting studies and collecting data. In: Higgins JPT, Green S (editors), Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.1.0 (updated March 2011). The Cochrane Collaboration, 2011. Available from www.handbook.cochrane.org.
  4. Higgins JP, Altman DG, Sterne JA (editors). Chapter 8: Assessing risk of bias in included studies. In: Higgins JPT, Churchill R, Chandler J, Cumpston MS (editors), Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions version 5.2.0 (updated June 2017), Cochrane, 2017. Available from www.training.cochrane.org/handbook. Law 2014
  5. Lefebvre C, Manheimer E, Glanville J. Chapter 6: Searching for studies. In: Higgins JPT, Green S (editors). Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.1.0 (updated March 2011). The Cochrane Collaboration, 2011. Available from www.handbook.cochrane.org.
  6. Review Manager 2014 [Computer program] Nordic Cochrane Centre, The Cochrane Collaboration Review Manager 5 (RevMan 5). Version 5.3. Copenhagen: Nordic Cochrane Centre, The Cochrane Collaboration, 2014.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Law, E., Fisher, E., Eccleston, C., & Palermo, T. M.
Affiliations
  • University of Washington (US)
  • Churchill Hospital (GB)
  • University of Bath (GB)
Venue
Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2019-03-18
Volume
2021
Issue
6
ISSN
  • 1361-6137 (ISSN-L)
  • 1465-1858
OpenAlex
W4240901129
Cited by
207
References
241
Citations by year
2026: 8 · 2025: 24 · 2024: 36 · 2023: 33 · 2022: 31 · 2021: 35 · 2020: 25 · 2019: 12 · 2017: 2 · 2012: 1
FWCI
6.61
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institute for Health and Care Research
  • National Institutes of Health
  • Evidence Synthesis Programme
  • National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (K23NS089966)
  • Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (K24HD060068)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Family Support in Illness
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Family and Disability Support Research
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Pharmacy › Nursing care and research
Keywords
psychological intervention, parents, children with chronic illness, adolescents with chronic illness, parental support, family caregiving

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review