Final Research Report
View this project's final research report.
Related Journal Citations
Peer review of PCORI-funded research helps make sure the report presents complete, balanced, and useful information about the research. It also confirms that the research has followed PCORI’s Methodology Standards. During peer review, experts who were not members of the research team read a draft report of the research. These experts may include a scientist focused on the research topic, a specialist in research methods, a patient or caregiver, and a healthcare professional. Reviewers do not have conflicts of interest with the study.
The peer reviewers point out where the draft report may need revision. For example, they may suggest ways to improve how the research team analyzed its results or reported its conclusions. Learn more about PCORI’s peer-review process here.
In response to peer review, the PI made changes including
- Providing more information about the measures of caregiver burden, particularly those identified as secondary outcomes. The reviewers had asked for the rationale behind having multiple primary and secondary outcome measures of burden and depression.
- Expanding the information regarding subgroup analyses by making sure that the abstract, results, and discussion adequately addressed these analyses, particularly as they related to caregiver age.
- Explaining that the researchers chose not to complete analyses that included an interaction term for subgroup (i.e., age by intervention type) because of the lack of significant differences between intervention groups in the main analyses.
- Revising the description of study outcomes, particularly those related to subgroups, in response to reviewers’ concerns about the inconsistent reporting of intervention differences by subgroups. Detailed subsections for subgroup analyses, one for primary outcomes and one for secondary outcomes, addressed these concerns
Conflict of Interest Disclosures
- Has Results