Web-Based Intervention for Family Carers of Persons with Dementia and Multiple Chronic Conditions (My Tools 4 Care): Pragmatic Randomized Controlled Trial
Open accessPublished version of a preprint
Abstract
BACKGROUND: My Tools 4 Care (MT4C) is a Web-based intervention that was developed based on the transitions theory. It is an interactive, self-administered, and portable toolkit containing six main sections intended to support carers of community-living persons with Alzheimer's disease and related dementia and multiple chronic conditions through their transition experiences. OBJECTIVE: The objective of our study was to evaluate the effectiveness of MT4C with respect to increasing hope, self-efficacy, and health-related quality of life in carers of community-living older persons with Alzheimer's disease and related dementia and multiple chronic conditions. METHODS: A multisite, pragmatic, mixed methods, longitudinal, repeated-measures, randomized controlled trial was conducted between June 2015 and April 2017. Eligible participants were randomized into either treatment (MT4C) or educational control groups. Following baseline measures, carers in the treatment group received 3 months of password-protected access to MT4C. Trained research assistants collected data from participants via phone on hope (Herth Hope Index [HHI]), self-efficacy (General Self-Efficacy Scale), and health-related quality of life (Short Form-12 item [version 2] health survey; SF-12v2) at baseline, 1, 3, and 6 months. The use and cost of health and social services (Health and Social Services Utilization Inventory) among participants were measured at baseline, 3, and 6 months. Analysis of covariance was used to identify group differences at 3 months, and generalized estimating equations were used to identify group differences over time. RESULTS: A total of 199 carers participated in this study, with 101 participants in the treatment group and 98 in the educational control group. Of all, 23% (45/199) participants withdrew during the study for various reasons, including institutionalization or death of the person with dementia and lack of time from the carer. In the treatment group, 73% (74/101) carers used MT4C at least once over the 3-month period. No significant differences in the primary outcome measure (mental component summary score from the SF-12v2) by group or time were noted at 3 months; however, significant differences were evident for HHI-factor 2 (P=.01), with higher hope scores in the treatment group than in the control group. General estimating equations showed no statistically significant group differences in terms of mental component summary score at all time points. Attrition and the fact that not all carers in the treatment group used MT4C may explain the absence of statistically significant results for the main outcome variable. CONCLUSIONS: Despite no significant differences between groups in terms of the primary outcome variable (mental component score), the significant differences in terms of one of the hope factors suggest that MT4C had a positive influence on the lives of participants. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02428387; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02428387 (Archived by Webcite at http://www.webcitation.org/708oFCR8h).
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
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.
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?
Existing structures that had been adapted for dementia reported some improvement in preparing carers to support the patient's needs during transitions, but often neglected to provide health and wellbeing support for the carer.
“Existing structures that had been adapted for dementia (e.g., online education programmes) reported some improvement in preparing carers to support the patient’s needs during transitions, but often neglected to provide health and wellbeing support for the carer [28, 44, 52, 63, 68, 100, 101].”
From Do hospital-to-home transitions work for older adults with multiple long-term conditions including dementia? A realist review (2025) · cites this paper as [101]
The Introduction (page not provided) says My Tools 4 Care was developed to support carers through their own transitions and evaluated for effects on carers’ health-related quality of life, self-efficacy, and hope. It also reports that some earlier web-based interventions improved carer health outcomes. The Results describe some carers feeling helped with their transitions, not improved preparation to meet patients’ needs; the paper therefore runs contrary to the claim that such interventions neglected carers’ health and wellbeing. (LLM, conf=0.86)
Checked by a reasoning model — may be wrong.
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredOnline self-care education showed potential to improve mental health, wellbeing, and self-efficacy, helping carers feel more confident in their roles, and supported higher engagement in patient-focused interventions.
“Interventions to support carers were limited, though online self-care education showed potential to improve mental health, wellbeing, and self-efficacy, helping carers feel more confident in their roles, and supported higher engagement in patient-focused interventions (CMOC30) [28, 44, 52, 63, 68, 100, 101].”
From Do hospital-to-home transitions work for older adults with multiple long-term conditions including dementia? A realist review (2025) · cites this paper as [101]
The Introduction (page unavailable) describes web-based carer support as promising, and the Discussion > Principal Findings reports higher scores on a hope subscale reflecting confidence about the future. But the Discussion reports no significant differences in mental health or general self-efficacy between the intervention and control groups. It does not establish greater confidence in the caregiving role or higher engagement in patient-focused interventions. (LLM, conf=0.86)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredInterventions to support carers were limited.
“Interventions to support carers were limited, though online self-care education showed potential to improve mental health, wellbeing, and self-efficacy, helping carers feel more confident in their roles, and supported higher engagement in patient-focused interventions (CMOC30) [28, 44, 52, 63, 68, 100, 101].”
From Do hospital-to-home transitions work for older adults with multiple long-term conditions including dementia? A realist review (2025) · cites this paper as [101]
The Introduction (page unavailable) says carers of people with dementia lack resources to support them through caregiving transitions and that most reviewed web-based intervention studies were pilots. This supports a narrower claim about gaps in support, but not the broad statement that interventions to support carers generally were limited. (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.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 42 · Cited by 67
- Authors
- Duggleby, W., Ploeg, J., McAiney, C., Peacock, S., Fisher, K., Ghosh, S., Markle-Reid, M., Swindle, J., Williams, A., Triscott, J. A., Forbes, D., & Jovel Ruiz, K.
- Affiliations
- University of Alberta (CA)
- McMaster University (CA)
- University of Saskatchewan (CA)
- Glenrose Rehabilitation Hospital (CA)
- Western University (CA)
- Corresponding author
- Duggleby, Wendy
- ORCID
- Venue
- Journal of Medical Internet Research
- Publisher
- JMIR Publications Inc.
- Published
- 2018-06-29
- Volume
- 20
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- e10484
- ISSN
- 1438-8871 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC6045794
- OpenAlex
- W2803768232
- Cited by
- 67
- References
- 42
- Citations by year
- 2026: 5 · 2025: 11 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 14 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 2
- FWCI
- 13.72
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Licence
- cc-by
- Locations
- Journal of Medical Internet Research (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › Pharmacy › Nursing care and research
- 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
- family caregivers, dementia, multimorbidity, online intervention, transition theory, hope, self-efficacy, health-related quality of life, community-dwelling older adults, Alzheimer's disease, caregiver burden, intervention effectiveness evaluation
- MeSH terms
- Multiple Chronic Conditions, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Dementia, Female, Humans, Male, Quality of Life, Caregivers, Internet
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