José Manuel Sousa São José1, Carla Alexandra Filipe Amado2, Stefania Ilinca3, Sandra Catherine Buttigieg4, Annika Taghizadeh Larsson5. 1. Faculty of Economics, University of Algarve and CIEO, Faro, Portugal. 2. Faculty of Economics, University of Algarve and CEFAGE-UALG, Faro, Portugal. 3. European Centre for Social Welfare Policy and Research, Vienna, Austria. 4. Department of Health Services Management, University of Malta, Msida. 5. Department of Social and Welfare Studies, Linköping University, Norrköping, Sweden.
Abstract
PURPOSE: International and national bodies have identified tackling ageism in health care as an urgent goal. However, health professionals, researchers, and policy makers recognize that it is not easy to identity and fight ageism in practice, as the identification of multiple manifestations of ageism is dependent on the way it is defined and operationalized. This article reports on a systematic review of the operational definitions and inductive conceptualizations of ageism in the context of health care. DESIGN AND METHODS: We reviewed scientific articles published from January 1995 to June 2015 and indexed in the electronic databases Web of Science, PubMed, and Cochrane. Electronic searches were complemented with visual scanning of reference lists and hand searching of leading journals in the field of ageing and social gerontology. RESULTS: The review reveals that the predominant forms of operationalization and inductive conceptualization of ageism in the context of health care have neglected some components of ageism, namely the self-directed and implicit components. Furthermore, the instruments used to measure ageism in health care have as targets older people in general, not older patients in particular. IMPLICATIONS: The results have important implications for the advancement of research on this topic, as well as for the development of interventions to fight ageism in practice. There is a need to take into account underexplored forms of operationalization and inductive conceptualizations of ageism, such as self-directed ageism and implicit ageism. In addition, ageism in health care should be measured by using context-specific instruments.
PURPOSE: International and national bodies have identified tackling ageism in health care as an urgent goal. However, health professionals, researchers, and policy makers recognize that it is not easy to identity and fight ageism in practice, as the identification of multiple manifestations of ageism is dependent on the way it is defined and operationalized. This article reports on a systematic review of the operational definitions and inductive conceptualizations of ageism in the context of health care. DESIGN AND METHODS: We reviewed scientific articles published from January 1995 to June 2015 and indexed in the electronic databases Web of Science, PubMed, and Cochrane. Electronic searches were complemented with visual scanning of reference lists and hand searching of leading journals in the field of ageing and social gerontology. RESULTS: The review reveals that the predominant forms of operationalization and inductive conceptualization of ageism in the context of health care have neglected some components of ageism, namely the self-directed and implicit components. Furthermore, the instruments used to measure ageism in health care have as targets older people in general, not older patients in particular. IMPLICATIONS: The results have important implications for the advancement of research on this topic, as well as for the development of interventions to fight ageism in practice. There is a need to take into account underexplored forms of operationalization and inductive conceptualizations of ageism, such as self-directed ageism and implicit ageism. In addition, ageism in health care should be measured by using context-specific instruments.
Authors: David Burnes; Christine Sheppard; Charles R Henderson; Monica Wassel; Richenda Cope; Chantal Barber; Karl Pillemer Journal: Am J Public Health Date: 2019-06-20 Impact factor: 9.308
Authors: Lindsay C Kobayashi; Ashly C Westrick; Aalap Doshi; Katrina R Ellis; Carly R Jones; Elizabeth LaPensee; Alison M Mondul; Megan A Mullins; Lauren P Wallner Journal: Cancer Date: 2022-02-23 Impact factor: 6.921