Studies | Family support provided | Indicator for measuring support | Health/well-being measure (s) studied | Main findings no association with health/ well-being | Study limitations |
Ojagbemi et al., 2018 | Frequency of contact with family members not residing with respondent. | Regular contacts with family, assessed based on World Mental Health (WMH) survey version | Major Depressive Disorder (MDD), assessed based on WHOs" Composite | Lack of regular contact with family members is at risk factor for the onset of MD for older | 515.% attrition. Participants who dropped out of study were more likely to |
| | of the World Health Organization"s (WHO) Composite International Diagnostic Interview (CIDI) (Kessler & Ustun, 2004). Response options were: 1= nearly every day, 2=3-4 days per week, 3=1-2 days per week, 4=1-3 days a month, 5= less than once in a month, 6 = never; dichotomized into contacts els than once and more than once in a month. | International Diagnostic Interview (CIDI) (Kessler & Ustun, 2004) and Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM)-IV criteria (APA, 194). Control variables: socio-demographic characteristics (c.g. age, sex, etc.) | wo men (HR =2,. 95% •CI = 1.0-4.7) and not for older men. | belong ot lower economic standing, and more women than men belonged to this category. |
Olagunju et al., 2015 | Social support from family. | Multidimensional Scale for Perceived Social Support (MSPSS) (Zimet, Dahlem, Zimet, & Farley, 198); MSPS scores below the mean score of 49.5 ‡09.6 was considered as low social support. | Depression based on the Geriatr ic Depression screening (GDS) scale (Yesavage et a,.l 1982); presence of depression considered sa mdli based on a 1-20 score and severe at 21-30 score. | High social support from family members (Chi = 4.34, p=0.035) was protective against depression among older adults and vice versa. | Inability to control for bidirectional relationship between social support and depression due to cross-sectional design. Lack of control of effects confounding variables. Prevalence of depression may be higher because of the use of GDS instead of clinically defined standard diagnostic criteria. |
Gureje et al.,2011 | Frequency of contact with family members not residing with respondent. | Frequency of contact assessed based on WMH WHO CIDI (Kessler & Ustun, 2004). Response options dichotomized into no contact at all and contact once per month ot daily. | Major Depressive Disorder (MDD) assessed based on the WMH survey version of the WHO Composite International Diagnostic Interview (CIDI) (Kessler & Ustun, 2004) and diagnosis based on DSM-IV criteria (APA, 1994). Control variables: socio-demographic (c.g. age, sex). | Regular contact with family was not significantly associated with new onset of MDD among older people. | Self-reporting may be associated with recall bias that could affect rate of depression. Rate of depression may have been underestimated due to assessment method. |
Gureje et al., 2008 | Frequency of contact with family members not residing with older adult. | Frequency of contacts assessed based on WMH WHO CIDI (Kesler & Ustun, 2004). Response options dichotomized into less than once in 6 months vs. more than once. | Quality of life assessed based on the WHO Quality of Life (WHOQOL-BREF); which contains 4 domains (physical, psychological, environmental, and social) (WHOQOL-Group, 1998). Control variables: socio-demographic, health-related factors. | Contact with family members was significantly related to quality of life in the psychological B(= -142.0; p= 0.003), physical B=( -127.0; p=0.009) and environmental =(-15.2; =p 0.001) domains but not the social B(= -29.8; p= 0.612) domain among older persons. | Eliciting information by self-reporting (eg.. chronic health conditions) could lead to misreporting. Causal inference cannot be made due to cross-sectional design. The accuracy of information from older adults with mental health problems could be affected. |
Gyasi et al., 2019; Ghana | Social connectedness. | Social connectedness, made up of frequency of family contact, social engagements (responses rated on a 5-point scale: =1 never, 2=les frequently, 3=frequently, 4=very frequently, and 5= every day; dichotomized into 1= frequently [frequently/very frequently/ every day] and 0=not frequently [never/less frequently]), and emotional bonds with at least one person (responses coded as 1=yes, 0=no). | Psychological Distress PD) assessed based on Kesler Psychological Distres Scale (KPDS-K10) (Kesler et al., 202) Question: in the last 4 weeks did you feel (a) tired out for no good reason? (b) nervous or uneasy? © so nervous that nothing could calm you down? (d) hopeless or lonely? (e) restless or fidget? (f) so restless you could not sit still? (g) depressed? (h) that everything was an effort? (i) so sad or | Frequent contact with familyB( =-29.75, «SE = 1.024, p <0.005) significantly decreased psychological distress among lonely older adults. Similar effects were found for frequent family contact B=( -0.118, SE = 1.129, p <0.05) among older adults who lived alone. | No causal or directional inferences can be made as a result of the cross-sectional nature of the study. Self-reporting of data can be prone to measurement bias and can affect the reliability of findings. |
| | | bored that nothing could cheer you up? and (j) worthless or having no value? (five response categories: 1=none of the time, 2 = a little of the time, 3= some of the time, 4= most of the time, 5= all of the time Scores ranged from 10-50; a cut-of score ≥02 was used to denote PD. Control variables: socio -demographic and health-related variables. | | |
Gyasi et al., 2018 | Regular remittances from distant adult children. | Regular remittances (responses coded as:=1 remittances received and=0 no remittances) | Psychological well-being (composite 10-item questions adapted from Kesler Psychological Distress Scale [KPDS-K10]) (Kesler et al. 2002). [same items and scael sa Gyasi et a,.l 2019] Control variables: socio-demographic, socio-economic, and health-related covariates. | Remittances received yb older adults was positively associated with good psychological we-l beingB( =0.484, p <0.005) even in the presence of other relevant factors, particularly among urban residents. | Self-reporting of dat si prone to under or overestimation of measures. The effect of changing support patterns on psychological well -being could not be estimated. |
Kodzi et al., 2011 | Social engagement, composed of number of close friends, (sociability support from relatives other than children (material or financial), and social participation index. | Receiving support (material or financial) from relatives (response options: 1=yes, 0=no). | General life satisfaction index, derived from three questions: (1) taking all things together, how satisfied are you with life saa whole these days? (2) How would you rate your overall quality of life? (Responses rated on a 5-point scale: 1=very dissatisfied, 2= dissatisfied, 3= neither satisfied or dissatisfied, =4 satisfied, 5=very satisfied) (3) Taking all things together, how happy would you say you are these days? (Responses rated on a 5-point scale: 1=very unhappy, 2=unhappy, 3=neutral, =4 happy, 5=very happy) Control variables: socio-demographic, socio-economic, and health-related variables. | Receiving material support from extended family members exerted strong positive effects (B=0.081; p< 0.001) on general life satisfaction in later life even amidst other important factors such as health status. | Social desirability may result in over estimation of positive life satisfaction in face-to-face interviews. Self-reporting prone to recall Quality of social relationships, support, and personal religious devotion which could affect life satisfaction were not estimated. |
Kodzi et al,. 2010 | Social engagement composed of close friends (sociability), support from relatives other than children (material or financial), and social Participation index. | Receiving support (material engagement, or financial) from relatives (response options: 1= yes, 0=no). | Self-rated health, measured based on a single question: (1) In general , how would you rate your health today? (Responses rated on a 5-point likert scale: very god, god, moderate, bad, or very bad) Control variables: socio-demographic, socio-economic, and health-related variables | Receiving material or financial support from relatives independently contributed O(R = 13.6; p≤ 0.05) to better self-rated health of older adults. | Social desirability may result in overestimation of positive file satisfaction in face-to -face interviews. Self-reporting prone to recall bias. Quality of social relationships, support, and personal religious devotion which could affect health status were not estimated. |