陷入行政泥潭的老年人:对 6 个被边缘化的老年人群体的政策和计划协调的范围审查。

IF 4.6 2区 医学 Q1 GERONTOLOGY
Patrik Marier, Meghan Joy, Sandra Smele, Rym Zakaria, Julie Beauchamp, Valérie Bourgeois-Guérin, Pierre-Luc Lupien, Tamara Sussman
{"title":"陷入行政泥潭的老年人:对 6 个被边缘化的老年人群体的政策和计划协调的范围审查。","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":"{\"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}","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

摘要

背景和目标:政府行动的协调工作因高度相互依存的政策和方案而变得十分拥挤,有时甚至是各自为政,甚至相互矛盾。对于一般老年人来说,这些困境或行政泥潭更为严重,但对于边缘化的老年人来说,问题尤为突出,因为这些群体往往需要公共援助和支持。这篇范围综述研究了社会科学期刊上发表的关于老龄化问题的政府行动协调,重点关注六个边缘化老年人群体:有移民史的人、有严重精神健康问题的人、有无家可归经历的人、曾被监禁的人、LGBT(女同性恋、男同性恋、双性恋和变性者)群体成员以及生活在农村地区的人:研究设计与方法:采用五阶段范围审查方法,对五个社会科学数据库中的 53 篇文章(发表于 2000-2022 年间)进行了分析:分析结果显示,以协调为主要重点的文章数量有限。对协调的理解各不相同,但倾向于研究结构、组织和部门之间的关系。当协调成为研究的主要对象时,往往是在一个特定的政策领域或在临床环境中按照促进护理协调的思路进行分析:本次范围审查揭示了公共管理和政策学者对边缘化老年人的相互忽视,以及研究针对这些边缘化老年人的长期护理和社会服务项目的学者缺乏公共管理方面的考虑。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Older Adults in Administrative Quagmire: A Scoping Review of Policy and Program Coordination Across Six Marginalized Older Adult Populations.

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.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Gerontologist
Gerontologist GERONTOLOGY-
CiteScore
11.00
自引率
8.80%
发文量
171
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.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信