Cited by 21Nursing care and researchAging, Elder Care, and Social IssuesIntergenerational Family Dynamics and Caregiving

Healthcare system navigation difficulties among informal caregivers of older adults: a logistic regression analysis of social capital, caregiving support and utilization factors

Open access
Kim, Boah, Wister, Andrew, Mitchell, Barbara, Li, Lun, Kadowaki, Laura·2024·BMC Health Services Research

Abstract

Background: Informal caregivers of older adults play a vital role in improving the degree to which older adults access community and healthcare services in a seamless and timely manner. They are fulfilling important navigation and support roles for their older care recipients. However, there is still little knowledge of the most significant facilitators and barriers to effective and efficient system navigation among caregivers. This paper aims to fill these knowledge gaps through investigation of the key factors (i.e., social capital/cohesion, caregiving supports, and utilization factors) affecting navigation difficulties faced by informal caregivers of older adults. Methods: The Behavioural-Ecological Framework of Healthcare Access and Navigation (BEAN) model is used to frame the study. Using the General Social Survey on Caregiving and Care Receiving 2018, we analyzed 2,733 informal caregivers whose primary care recipients were aged 65 or older. Hierarchical logistic regression was conducted to identify the relationship between system navigation difficulties among informal caregivers and four sequentially ordered blocks of predictors: (1) sociodemographic (2), social capital/cohesion (3), caregiving supports, and (4) healthcare demand. Results: The fully adjusted model showed that the probability of reporting navigation difficulties was lower for caregivers with social capital/cohesion compared to those without social capital/cohesion. In comparison, the probability of reporting navigation difficulties was higher among caregivers with caregiving support and among caregivers whose care receivers use a higher amount of health service use. Several sociodemographic covariates were also identified. Conclusion: Our findings support certain aspects of the BEAN model. This study extends our understanding of potential facilitators and barriers that informal caregivers of older adults face while navigating complex community and health systems. There is a need to implement coordinated schemes and health policies especially for older adults with mental/neurological issues to address the challenges of their caregivers given the specific vulnerability identified in this study. The need for further research using different approaches to examine the disproportionate impact of COVID-19 on caregivers’ system navigation experience is crucial.

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/s12913-024-11549-0

Cites

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?

  • Previous efforts often faltered because they relied on fragmented initiatives, short-term funding, or the efforts of individual champions.

    “Previous efforts often faltered because they relied on fragmented initiatives, short-term funding, or the efforts of individual champions [48,49].”

    From Home care comparison (2026) · cites this paper as [48]

    The Conclusions describe fragmented healthcare systems and call for coordinated initiatives, but do not assess whether previous initiatives faltered. Searches for short-term funding and individual champions found no passage addressing those proposed reasons for failure. (LLM, conf=0.75)

    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.

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 82 · Cited by 21

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. [67]Swinkels J, Tilburg Tv, Verbakel E, Broese van Groenou M. Explaining the gender gap in the caregiving burden of partner caregivers. Journals Gerontology: Ser B. 2019;74(2):309–17. PMC6327655 28379560
  2. [77]Charles L, Bremault-Phillips S, Parmar J, Johnson M, Sacrey LA. Understanding how to support family caregivers of seniors with Complex needs. Can Geriatr J. 2017;20(2):75–84. 28690707 PMC5495539 · DOI

Authors
Kim, B., Wister, A., Mitchell, B., Li, L., & Kadowaki, L.
Affiliations
Simon Fraser University (CA)
Corresponding author
Kim, Boah
Venue
BMC Health Services Research
Published
2024-10-01
Volume
24
Issue
1
Pages
1159-1159
ISSN
1472-6963 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4403039542
Cited by
21
References
82
Citations by year
2026: 13 · 2025: 8
FWCI
14.21
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • BMC Health Services Research (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Pharmacy › Nursing care and research
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Aging, Elder Care, and Social Issues
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Intergenerational Family Dynamics and Caregiving
Keywords
informal caregivers, older adults, health system navigation, social capital, social cohesion, caregiver support, health care utilization, caregiver burden, sociodemographic factors
MeSH terms
Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Female, Health Services Accessibility, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Social Support, Logistic Models, Caregivers, Patient Navigation, Social Capital

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