Cited by 24Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of LifeDementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchPalliative Care and End-of-Life Issues

Health economics research into supporting carers of people with dementia: a systematic review of outcome measures

Open access
Jones, Carys, Edwards, Rhiannon Tudor, Hounsome, Barry·2012·Health and Quality of Life Outcomes

Abstract

Advisory bodies, such as the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) in the UK, advocate using preference based instruments to measure the quality of life (QoL) component of the quality-adjusted life year (QALY). Cost per QALY is used to determine cost-effectiveness, and hence funding, of interventions. QALYs allow policy makers to compare the effects of different interventions across different patient groups. Generic measures may not be sensitive enough to fully capture the QoL effects for certain populations, such as carers, so there is a need to consider additional outcome measures, which are preference based where possible to enable cost-effectiveness analysis to be undertaken. This paper reviews outcome measures commonly used in health services research and health economics research involving carers of people with dementia. An electronic database search was conducted in PubMed, Medline, the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), PsycINFO, the National Health Service Economic Evaluation Database (NHS EED), Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (DARE) and Health Technology Assessment database. Studies were eligible for inclusion if they included an outcome measure for carers of people with dementia. 2262 articles were identified. 455 articles describing 361 studies remained after exclusion criteria were applied. 228 outcome measures were extracted from the studies. Measures were categorised into 44 burden measures, 43 mastery measures, 61 mood measures, 32 QoL measures, 27 social support and relationships measures and 21 staff competency and morale measures. The choice of instrument has implications on funding decisions; therefore, researchers need to choose appropriate instruments for the population being measured and the type of intervention undertaken. If an instrument is not sensitive enough to detect changes in certain populations, the effect of an intervention may be underestimated, and hence interventions which may appear to be beneficial to participants are not deemed cost-effective and are not funded. If this is the case, it is essential that additional outcome measures which detect changes in broader QoL are included, whilst still retaining preference based utility measures such as EQ-5D to allow QALY calculation for comparability with other interventions.

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 · 10.1186/1477-7525-10-142

Cites

50 of 50 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?

  • More recently developed specific measures of carer QoL such as the Carer Experience Scale and the Care Related Quality of Life (CarerQol) may be more appropriate as they can detect the broader impact of caring on a carer's life.

    “Instead, more recently developed specific measures of carer QoL such as the Carer Experience Scale (Al-Janabi et al. , 2008) and the Care Related Quality of Life (CarerQol) (Brouwer et al. , 2006) (e.g., the assessment of activities outside caring, carer-recipient relationship) may be more appropriate as it can detect the broader impact of caring on a carers' life (Jones et al. , 2012).”

    From Which interventions work for dementia family carers?: an updated systematic review of randomized controlled trials of carer interventions. (2018) · cites this paper as Jones et al., 2012

    The Discussion (page unavailable) says population-specific measures cover broader domains and may be more sensitive than generic instruments; it also notes that the EQ-5D may miss changes in dementia carers’ quality of life. This supports the general rationale for considering carer-focused measures, but our copy does not identify the Carer Experience Scale or CarerQol or establish that those particular measures detect the broader impacts described. (LLM, conf=0.82)

    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

1 of the 51 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence Guide to the methods of technology appraisal 2008 London: National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence 27905712
  2. Luengo-Fernandez R Leal J Gray A Dementia 2010. The economic burden of dementia and associated research funding in the United Kingdom 2010 Cambridge: Alzheimer's Research Trust

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Jones, C., Edwards, R. T., & Hounsome, B.
Affiliations
Bangor University (GB)
Corresponding author
Jones, Carys
Venue
Health and Quality of Life Outcomes
Published
2012
Volume
10
Issue
1
Pages
142
ISSN
1477-7525 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2163767644
Cited by
24
References
51
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2024: 2 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 1 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 1
FWCI
0.49
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • Health and Quality of Life Outcomes (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
  • Bangor University Research Portal (Bangor University) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Funders
Bangor University
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Dementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Palliative Care and End-of-Life Issues
Keywords
dementia caregivers, outcome measures, quality of life, cost-effectiveness, quality-adjusted life years, EQ-5D, caregiver burden, mastery, mood, social support, employee skills, health economics
MeSH terms
Dementia, United Kingdom, Health Services Research, Humans, Quality of Life, Surveys and Questionnaires, Social Support, Caregivers, Outcome Assessment, Health Care, Quality-Adjusted Life Years

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