{"title":"Older Adults in Administrative Quagmire: A Scoping Review of Policy and Program Coordination Across Six Marginalized Older Adult Populations.","authors":"Patrik Marier, Meghan Joy, Sandra Smele, Rym Zakaria, Julie Beauchamp, Valérie Bourgeois-Guérin, Pierre-Luc Lupien, Tamara Sussman","doi":"10.1093/geront/gnae120","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and objectives: </strong>Coordination of governmental action is crowded with policies and programs that are highly interdependent, sometimes operating in silos if not contradicting each other. These dilemmas, or administrative quagmires, are heightened for older adults in general, but they are particularly problematic for marginalized older adults because these groups often require public assistance and support. This scoping review studies the coordination of governmental action on aging published in social science journals, focusing on 6 groups of marginalized older adults: those with histories of immigration, individuals with severe mental health problems, those who have had experiences of homelessness, formerly incarcerated individuals, members of the LGBT (lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender) community, and individuals living in a rural area.</p><p><strong>Research design and methods: </strong>A 5-stage scoping review methodology was followed, and 53 articles (published between 2000 and 2022) from 5 social science databases were analyzed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The analysis revealed a limited number of contributions with coordination as a primary focus. Understandings of coordination varied but tended to examine structure, organization, and relationships between sectors. When coordination was the primary object of a study, it was often analyzed in 1 specific policy area or within a clinical setting along the lines of facilitating care coordination.</p><p><strong>Discussion and implications: </strong>This scoping review reveals a mutual neglect on the part of public administration and policy scholars toward marginalized older adults and a lack of public administration considerations on the part of scholars studying long-term care and social service programs for these marginalized older adults.</p>","PeriodicalId":51347,"journal":{"name":"Gerontologist","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11535365/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Gerontologist","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/geront/gnae120","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"GERONTOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background and objectives: Coordination of governmental action is crowded with policies and programs that are highly interdependent, sometimes operating in silos if not contradicting each other. These dilemmas, or administrative quagmires, are heightened for older adults in general, but they are particularly problematic for marginalized older adults because these groups often require public assistance and support. This scoping review studies the coordination of governmental action on aging published in social science journals, focusing on 6 groups of marginalized older adults: those with histories of immigration, individuals with severe mental health problems, those who have had experiences of homelessness, formerly incarcerated individuals, members of the LGBT (lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender) community, and individuals living in a rural area.
Research design and methods: A 5-stage scoping review methodology was followed, and 53 articles (published between 2000 and 2022) from 5 social science databases were analyzed.
Results: The analysis revealed a limited number of contributions with coordination as a primary focus. Understandings of coordination varied but tended to examine structure, organization, and relationships between sectors. When coordination was the primary object of a study, it was often analyzed in 1 specific policy area or within a clinical setting along the lines of facilitating care coordination.
Discussion and implications: This scoping review reveals a mutual neglect on the part of public administration and policy scholars toward marginalized older adults and a lack of public administration considerations on the part of scholars studying long-term care and social service programs for these marginalized older adults.
期刊介绍:
The Gerontologist, published since 1961, is a bimonthly journal of The Gerontological Society of America that provides a multidisciplinary perspective on human aging by publishing research and analysis on applied social issues. It informs the broad community of disciplines and professions involved in understanding the aging process and providing care to older people. Articles should include a conceptual framework and testable hypotheses. Implications for policy or practice should be highlighted. The Gerontologist publishes quantitative and qualitative research and encourages manuscript submissions of various types including: research articles, intervention research, review articles, measurement articles, forums, and brief reports. Book and media reviews, International Spotlights, and award-winning lectures are commissioned by the editors.