Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 303

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 57 of the 57 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Determinants of overburdening among informal carers: a systematic review

Open access
Lindt, Nienke, van Berkel, Jantien, Mulder, Bob C.·2020·BMC Geriatrics

Abstract

Background: The world’s population is ageing, resulting in rising care demands and healthcare costs, which in turn lead to a shift from formal to informal care. However, not only is the number of potential informal carers fast decreasing, but also informal caregivers are experiencing a higher caregiver burden. This literature review aims to synthesize the literature on the common determinants of caregiver burden in Western countries, to help ensure future continuation of informal care in the home context, and to improve or sustain the quality of life of caregivers and patients alike. Method: A systematic review of peer-reviewed articles included in PubMed, Scopus, and/or PsychInfo was conducted. Results: Seventeen articles were included. The most important predictors were the duration of caregiving and the patient’s dependency level, in terms of both physical and mental dependency stemming from decreased cognitive capacity or behavioural problems. Some specific illnesses and role conflicts or captivity also increased caregiver burden, whereas social support lowered it. Being a female caregiver or having an adult–child relationship led to a higher burden. Conclusions: The most important predictors of caregiver burden are the duration of caregiving and the patient’s dependency level. In addition, the patient’s behavioural problems and cognitive capacity determine dependency level, and thus care burden. Interventions to relieve burden need to be adapted to the illness trajectory of specific diseases and corresponding needs for social support for both the recipient and the caregiver. Changing role expectations, leading to men being more involved, could reduce the disproportionately high burden for women.

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 · 10.1186/s12877-020-01708-3

Cites

57 of 57 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 57 references

Cited by

See all 303

Metadata

Authors
Lindt, N., van Berkel, J., & Mulder, B. C.
Venue
BMC Geriatrics
Published
2020-08-26
Volume
20
Issue
1
Pages
304-304
ISSN
1471-2318 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3081288176
Cited by
303
References
57
FWCI
6.77
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
gold

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: Determinants of overburdening among informal carers: a systematic review. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1186/s12877-020-01708-3
The paper
Lindt, N., van Berkel, J., & Mulder, B. C. (2020). Determinants of overburdening among informal carers: a systematic review. BMC Geriatrics. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12877-020-01708-3

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.