Blog

‘A much-needed scoping review that is highly relevant given the changes in healthcare’ is how reviewers have described Attracta Lafferty et al.’s scoping review protocol published on HRB Open Research.

Here, Attracta discusses the protocol that sets out to map the evidence on family carers who are balancing the demands of care giving and paid work, and the rigor of registered reports.

Tell us a little about your current research

An increasing number of family carers are finding themselves having to find ways of balancing paid employment with the demands of caring for a family member who has a disability, chronic illness or who is ageing. This is due to changing demographics, delayed retirement and increased participation of women in the workforce. These trends are set to continue meaning that more and more of us will have to combine work and care.

Juggling both roles can be a challenge for many family carers, but most indicate that retaining their job alongside caregiving can provide them with financial and social resources, while providing them with some respite away from caregiving obligations.

Why did you carry out a scoping review?

There has been a growing body of literature examining family carers who are in paid employment. The growth in ‘family-friendly’ and ‘work-life balance’ initiatives and policies in the workplace over the past decade has helped to raise awareness of other ‘caregiving’ situations which also need support and flexibility. However, the evidence has not been synthesised in any systematic way.

What do you aim to find and how will the results help to determine the next steps?

Our scoping review protocol sets out our plan as to how we will approach the literature. The review will then help to map out the available body of evidence and identify where attention has been directed and where the gaps lie.

The review will help us to identify the areas where research has already been conducted and to what extent, and to pinpoint the areas that require further attention when it comes to family carers who balance employment with caregiving responsibilities. As we are undertaking this review as part of a larger project called the CAREWELL project, results from the review will inform the next stages of the research and will prove a useful precursor to determine  whether a systematic review is warranted.

Why did you choose to write a registered report?

We chose to write a registered report, as we feel the approach provides transparency and a rigorous means for reducing bias and staying committed and focused to our original objectives.

What do you feel are the benefits of this approach?

We feel that writing a review as a registered report is a fast and efficient way of receiving peer feedback, particularly at the early stage of the process. It also means that we do not have to respond to different reviewers, who may have different perspectives, at different stages of the process.

What are your thoughts on open peer review?

Open peer review is a great way of increasing transparency in the peer review process. Sharing reviewers’ identities can help to reduce biases and increase reviewer’s integrity. Similarly, by sharing review comments, the process is accessible to the public, researchers across disciplines, as well as wider communities which helps to demystify the publication process.

We found the process efficient and generally quicker than traditional methods, which was great for us when developing the protocol at the early stage. Open peer review is an exciting and evolving field and has been a positive experience to date.