Horne, Joanna

Kentzer, Nichola

Smith, Lee

Trott, Mike

Vseteckova, Jitka

English

Open Research Online

Open Research OnlineThe Open University’s repository of research publicationsand other research outputsA systematic review on the prevalence of physicalactivity in informal / unpaid carers worldwideOtherHow to cite:Vseteckova, Jitka; Horne, Joanna; Smith, Lee; Trott, Mike and Kentzer, Nichola (2020). A systematic reviewon the prevalence of physical activity in informal / unpaid carers worldwide. Prospero - International prospectiveregister of systematic reviews, CRD42020184204.For guidance on citations see FAQs.c© [not recorded]Version: Version of RecordLink(s) to article on publisher’s website:https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42020184204Copyright and Moral Rights for the articles on this site are retained by the individual authors and/or other copyrightowners. For more information on Open Research Online’s data policy on reuse of materials please consult the policiespage.oro.open.ac.ukPROSPEROInternational prospective register of systematic reviewsA systematic review on the prevalence of physical activity in informal / unpaid carersworldwideJitka Vseteckova, Joanna Horne, Lee Smith, Mike Trott, Nichola Kentzer CitationJitka Vseteckova, Joanna Horne, Lee Smith, Mike Trott, Nichola Kentzer. A systematic review onthe prevalence of physical activity in informal / unpaid carers worldwide. PROSPERO 2020CRD42020184204 Available from: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42020184204 Review questionWhat is the prevalence of physical activity in unpaid / informal carers worldwide? SearchesThe search will include both quantitative and qualitative studies. There will be no restrictions on study designor date. Language will be limited to English only. The search strategy will be created by an expert insystematic review searching, in collaboration with the authors. A draft PubMed search is shown in the tablebelow. Once this strategy is finalised, it will be adapted to the syntax and subject headings of the otherdatabases.Draft PubMed search:Key words: (‘Carer’ OR ‘caregiver’ OR ‘family member’ OR ‘informal carer’) AND (‘physical activity’)Syntax: (carer[Title/Abstract] OR caregiver[Title/Abstract] OR family member[Title/Abstract] OR informalcarer[Title/Abstract]) AND (physical activity[Title/Abstract])The following electronic databases will be searched:1. PubMed 2. SPORTDiscus3. PsycINFO4. CINAHLAdditionally, grey literature will be searched in OpenGrey, Google and Google Scholar. The search term“physical activity of carers” will be used to identify grey literature because they were identified as the mostrelevant terms in the exploratory and database searches. In addition, reference lists of all relevant studies,reviews and reports will be searched. Types of study to be includedArticles and reports related to the topic of physical activity of carers will be identified through searches usingelectronic databases. The purpose of the current systematic review is to synthesize all relevant availableknowledge. To provide a comprehensive overview of this research topic, all existing literature will beincluded, e.g. primary research studies, systematic reviews, meta-analyses, letters, guidelines, websites etc.The search will be limited to literature written in English and based on carers worldwide, excluding the UK asthis is focus of another review (PROSPERO 2020 CRD42020162032). No date restrictions will be applied.                                Page: 1 / 5PROSPEROInternational prospective register of systematic reviewsCondition or domain being studiedThis review will focus on informal (unpaid carers). The New Policy Institute states that “Informal carersprovide care on an unpaid basis, often to family members… Formal care, in contrast, is provided in return forpayment”. However, although frequently used, there are objections to the term ‘informal carers’ as “thecaring service provided by ‘informal’ carers is formal in everything but the receipt of pay, and many carersfeel that they have had little choice in taking on their role” (p. 1) and so the term ‘unpaid carer’ is often usedinstead. This review will utilise both the terms ‘informal’ and ‘unpaid’ carer and will include anyone “wholooks after a family member, partner or friend who needs help because of their illness, frailty, disability, amental health problem or an addiction and cannot cope without their support. The care they give is unpaid”. Participants/populationParticipants Eligible participants include:i) Carers for individuals suffering from any condition requiring care, we will exclude parenthood and excludebereaved carersii) Carers must not be caring for the individual as part of their professional vocation i.e. they will be unpaidfamily members or friendsiii) Carers can be from any age group (including ageing carers of 65+, working age carers aged 25-65, andyoung carers <25)iv) Carers must be based outside of the UK Intervention(s), exposure(s)InterventionsLevels of physical activity - all physical activity will be included Comparator(s)/controlNone Main outcome(s)The primary outcomes of interest are levels of physical activity in unpaid / informal carers for individuals withany condition requiring care. To be included in the review, records will be required to report at least one ofthe following outcome measures:1. Carers’ level of physical activity (either self-report or objective)2. Carers’ desired level of physical activityPhysical activity has been shown to provide clear health benefits including reduced risk of cardiovasculardisease, certain cancers, stress and depression, and improved mental / cognitive health, wellbeing and sleep(Reiner et al., 2013; Warburton et al., 2006). Therefore, knowing the barriers and facilitators to physicalactivity for carers allows researchers to develop targeted interventions to improve the mental and physicalwellbeing of this specific population. Furthermore, physical activity per se is now recognised as a healthoutcome by major funding councils and government organisations.* Measures of effectNot applicable Additional outcome(s)The primary outcomes of interest relate to the levels and types of physical activity being achieved by unpaidcarers outside of the UK. It is expected that outcomes will be diverse and context-specific, therefore it is notpossible to produce an exhaustive list at the outset. However, examples of primary outcomes may include:                               Page: 2 / 5PROSPEROInternational prospective register of systematic reviews• Measure of time (e.g. minutes / hours) spent on physical activity per time period (e.g. day / week) – eitherself-reported or objectively measured• Percentage of carers reporting that they achieve their own desired level of physical activity• Types of physical activity that carers report undertakingSecondary outcomes relate to the level of physical activity desired by carers worldwide, outside of the UK.Again, these are expected to be context-specific, but secondary outcomes may include:• Amount of time (e.g. minutes / hours) that carers would like to spend on physical activity per time period(e.g. day / week)• Types of physical activity that carers would like to partake in* Measures of effectNot applicable Data extraction (selection and coding)We plan to extract data on the participants, interventions, comparators, and outcomes. In addition to that theextraction sheet will include authors, year of study/report, aim/purpose, type of paper (e.g. journal article,annual evaluation report, etc), geographical area, study population (e.g. age of carers and condition ofindividuals being cared for), sample size, study design, and key findings that relate to the systematic reviewquestion. Two reviewers will independently extract data using a structured data extraction form.Disagreements between review authors will be resolved by discussion or a third author.At least two reviewers will independently extract data from each included study and insert this into the Excelspreadsheet. Disagreements between the reviewers will be resolved by discussion, or by a third reviewer.Study authors will be contacted to resolve any uncertainties. Risk of bias (quality) assessmentTwo reviewers will independently assess the risk of bias using the Cochrane risk of bias tool, which includesthe following domains: random sequence generation, allocation concealment, blinding of outcome assessors,completeness of outcome data, and selective outcome reporting. We also plan to assess the followingadditional sources of bias: baseline imbalance and inappropriate administration of an intervention asrecommended by the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Studies will be judged athigh risk of bias if there was a high risk of bias for 1 or more key domains and at unclear risk of bias if theyhad an unclear risk of bias for at least 2 domains. Authors of papers will be contacted if information ismissing. Strategy for data synthesisFindings from included studies will be synthesized narratively. The ‘Guidance on the Conduct of NarrativeSynthesis in Systematic Reviews’ will be used to advise the narrative synthesis. First, a preliminarysynthesis will be conducted to develop an initial description of the findings of included records and toorganize them so that patterns across records can be identified. In a second step, thematic analysis will beused to analyse the findings. The following five steps of thematic analysis will be followed adopting arecursive process:a) Familiarization with the extracted datab) Generation of initial codesc) Searching for themesd) Reviewing themese) Defining and naming themes                               Page: 3 / 5PROSPEROInternational prospective register of systematic reviewsDepending on the findings available, the reviewers will aim to provide a flow chart mapping the physicalactivity of carers. This review will highlight the current and desired levels of physical activity of carers, as wellas the need for more high-quality research in this field. The information presented in this review may beconsidered, in the future, by primary care providers and funding bodies when planning future support for thisgrowing population of carers.Meta-analysis will be conducted if data is found to be sufficiently homogeneous. We will decide if it isappropriate to pool our measures of effect by assessing if the included studies are similar enough (in termsof their population, intervention characteristics, and reported outcomes) to draw meaningful conclusions. Analysis of subgroups or subsetsNot applicable Contact details for further informationJitka Vseteckovajitka.vseteckova@open.ac.uk Organisational affiliation of the reviewThe Open University Review team members and their organisational affiliationsDr Jitka Vseteckova. The Open UniversityDr Joanna Horne. The Open UniversityDr Lee Smith. Anglia Ruskin UniversityMr Mike Trott. Anglia Ruskin UniversityDr Nichola Kentzer. The Open University Type and method of reviewNarrative synthesis, Systematic review Anticipated or actual start date01 April 2020 Anticipated completion date31 December 2021 Funding sources/sponsorsNot applicable Conflicts of interestNone known LanguageEnglish CountryEngland Stage of reviewReview Ongoing Subject index terms statusSubject indexing assigned by CRD Subject index termsCaregivers; Exercise; Humans; Prevalence; Social Support Date of registration in PROSPERO27 May 2020                                Page: 4 / 5PROSPEROInternational prospective register of systematic reviewsDate of first submission04 May 2020 Stage of review at time of this submission Stage Started CompletedPreliminary searches Yes NoPiloting of the study selection process No NoFormal screening of search results against eligibility criteria No NoData extraction No NoRisk of bias (quality) assessment No NoData analysis No NoThe record owner confirms that the information they have supplied for this submission is accurate andcomplete and they understand that deliberate provision of inaccurate information or omission of data may beconstrued as scientific misconduct.The record owner confirms that they will update the status of the review when it is completed and will addpublication details in due course. Versions27 May 2020 PROSPEROThis information has been provided by the named contact for this review. CRD has accepted this information in goodfaith and registered the review in PROSPERO. The registrant confirms that the information supplied for this submissionis accurate and complete. CRD bears no responsibility or liability for the content of this registration record, anyassociated files or external websites.Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)                               Page: 5 / 5

A systematic review on the prevalence of physical activity in informal / unpaid carers worldwide

http://oro.open.ac.uk/70627/1/CRD42020184204.pdf

A systematic review on the prevalence of physical activity in informal / unpaid carers worldwide

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Open Research Online