Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 257

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 84 of the 84 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Caregivers’ contributions to heart failure self-care: A systematic review

Buck, Harleah G, Harkness, Karen, Wion, Rachel, Carroll, Sandra L, Cosman, Tammy, Kaasalainen, Sharon, Kryworuchko, Jennifer, McGillion, Michael, O’Keefe-McCarthy, Sheila, Sherifali, Diana, Strachan, Patricia H, Arthur, Heather M·2015·European Journal of Cardiovascular Nursing

Abstract

AIMS: The purpose of this study was to conduct a systematic review answering the following questions: (a) what specific activities do caregivers (CGs) contribute to patients' self-care in heart failure (HF)?; and (b) how mature (or developed) is the science of the CG contribution to self-care? METHODS: MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), the Cochrane Library and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched using the terms heart failure and caregiv* as well as the keywords 'careers', 'family members' and 'lay persons' for studies published between 1948 and September 2012. Inclusion criteria for studies were: informal CGs of adult HF patients-either as dependent/independent variable in quantitative studies or participant in qualitative studies; English language. Exclusion criteria for studies were: formal CGs; pediatric, adult congenital, or devices or transplant CGs; mixed diagnosis; non-empiric reports or reports publishing duplicate results. Each study was abstracted and confirmed by two authors. After CG activities were identified and theoretically categorized, an analysis across studies was conducted. RESULTS: Forty papers were reviewed from a pool of 283 papers. CGs contribute substantively to HF patients' self-care characterized from concrete (weighing the patient) to interpersonal (providing understanding). Only two studies attempted to quantify the impact of CGs' activities on patients' self-care reporting a positive impact. Our analysis provides evidence for a rapidly developing science that is based largely on observational research. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS OF KEY FINDINGS: To our knowledge, this is the first systematic review to examine CGs' contributions in depth. Informal caregivers play a major role in HF self-care. Longitudinal research is needed to examine the impact of CGs' contributions on patient self-care outcomes.

Overview

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 · 10.1177/1474515113518434

Cites

84 of 84 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

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

Self-check

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

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

Citations

Cites

Show all 84 references

Cited by

See all 257

Metadata

Authors
Buck, H. G., Harkness, K., Wion, R., Carroll, S. L., Cosman, T., Kaasalainen, S., Kryworuchko, J., McGillion, M., O’Keefe-McCarthy, S., Sherifali, D., Strachan, P. H., & Arthur, H. M.
Venue
European Journal of Cardiovascular Nursing
Published
2014-01-06
Volume
14
Issue
1
Pages
79-89
ISSN
  • 1474-5151 (ISSN-L)
  • 1873-1953
OpenAlex
W2140360659
Cited by
257
References
84
FWCI
4.66
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Caregivers’ contributions to heart failure self-care: A systematic review. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1177/1474515113518434
The paper
Buck, H. G., Harkness, K., Wion, R., Carroll, S. L., Cosman, T., Kaasalainen, S., Kryworuchko, J., McGillion, M., O’Keefe-McCarthy, S., Sherifali, D., Strachan, P. H., & Arthur, H. M. (2015). Caregivers’ contributions to heart failure self-care: A systematic review. European Journal of Cardiovascular Nursing. https://doi.org/10.1177/1474515113518434

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.