健康科学研究中老年人口脆弱性的观察:系统回顾

Aline Gabrício Marçola, G. Cipolli, Danyela Casadei Donatelli, Nivaldo Carneiro Júnior, V. Nascimento
{"title":"健康科学研究中老年人口脆弱性的观察:系统回顾","authors":"Aline Gabrício Marçola, G. Cipolli, Danyela Casadei Donatelli, Nivaldo Carneiro Júnior, V. Nascimento","doi":"10.53886/gga.e0230021","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The objective of this study was to systematically investigate and review studies on the concept of vulnerability associated with the health of the older population. Articles were selected, filtered, and analyzed following the steps recommended by the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Screening and data extraction were performed independently by 2 reviewers using templates developed by the authors. Data extracted included specific details about population, interest, and context. Studies were eligible for inclusion if they: 1) were cross-sectional or prospective, 2) involved community-dwellers aged ≥60 years, 3) were published in the last 10 years, and 4) had as a concept vulnerability associated with the health of the older population. A total of 833 studies were identified and screened, 26 of which were included. Most included studies addressed vulnerability in older adults as an individual aspect, whether biological or psychological. The remaining studies reported vulnerability as affecting socio-environmental, health care system, and multifactorial aspects. Therefore, the concept of “vulnerability in older people” was not properly defined in the biomedical scientific community. When we return to the guiding question of this review, we can conclude that the conditions of vulnerability of older people are being treated broadly and diversely, producing different methodological strategies. The systematic review was conducted in the United States National Library of Medicine (PubMed), Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature (LILACS), and Scientific Electronic Library Online (SciELO) databases between August and December 2020 and updated in September 2022, with registration number CRD42022361649.","PeriodicalId":52782,"journal":{"name":"Geriatrics Gerontology and Aging","volume":"59 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A look at vulnerability in the older population in health sciences studies: a systematic review\",\"authors\":\"Aline Gabrício Marçola, G. Cipolli, Danyela Casadei Donatelli, Nivaldo Carneiro Júnior, V. Nascimento\",\"doi\":\"10.53886/gga.e0230021\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The objective of this study was to systematically investigate and review studies on the concept of vulnerability associated with the health of the older population. Articles were selected, filtered, and analyzed following the steps recommended by the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Screening and data extraction were performed independently by 2 reviewers using templates developed by the authors. Data extracted included specific details about population, interest, and context. Studies were eligible for inclusion if they: 1) were cross-sectional or prospective, 2) involved community-dwellers aged ≥60 years, 3) were published in the last 10 years, and 4) had as a concept vulnerability associated with the health of the older population. A total of 833 studies were identified and screened, 26 of which were included. Most included studies addressed vulnerability in older adults as an individual aspect, whether biological or psychological. The remaining studies reported vulnerability as affecting socio-environmental, health care system, and multifactorial aspects. Therefore, the concept of “vulnerability in older people” was not properly defined in the biomedical scientific community. When we return to the guiding question of this review, we can conclude that the conditions of vulnerability of older people are being treated broadly and diversely, producing different methodological strategies. The systematic review was conducted in the United States National Library of Medicine (PubMed), Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature (LILACS), and Scientific Electronic Library Online (SciELO) databases between August and December 2020 and updated in September 2022, with registration number CRD42022361649.\",\"PeriodicalId\":52782,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Geriatrics Gerontology and Aging\",\"volume\":\"59 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Geriatrics Gerontology and Aging\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.53886/gga.e0230021\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Geriatrics Gerontology and Aging","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.53886/gga.e0230021","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本研究的目的是系统地调查和回顾与老年人健康相关的脆弱性概念的研究。按照系统评价和荟萃分析(PRISMA)指南推荐的步骤对文章进行选择、筛选和分析。筛选和数据提取由2名审稿人使用作者开发的模板独立完成。提取的数据包括关于人口、兴趣和背景的具体细节。符合纳入条件的研究:1)具有横断面或前瞻性,2)涉及年龄≥60岁的社区居民,3)发表于过去10年,以及4)脆弱性作为一个概念与老年人口的健康相关。共有833项研究被确定和筛选,其中26项被纳入。大多数纳入的研究将老年人的脆弱性视为个体方面,无论是生物方面还是心理方面。其余的研究报告脆弱性影响社会环境、卫生保健系统和多因素方面。因此,“老年人脆弱性”的概念在生物医学科学界没有得到适当的定义。当我们回到本次审查的指导问题时,我们可以得出结论,老年人的脆弱性状况正在得到广泛而多样化的对待,产生了不同的方法策略。该系统评价于2020年8月至12月在美国国家医学图书馆(PubMed)、拉丁美洲和加勒比健康科学文献(LILACS)和科学电子图书馆在线(SciELO)数据库中进行,并于2022年9月更新,注册号为CRD42022361649。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
A look at vulnerability in the older population in health sciences studies: a systematic review
The objective of this study was to systematically investigate and review studies on the concept of vulnerability associated with the health of the older population. Articles were selected, filtered, and analyzed following the steps recommended by the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Screening and data extraction were performed independently by 2 reviewers using templates developed by the authors. Data extracted included specific details about population, interest, and context. Studies were eligible for inclusion if they: 1) were cross-sectional or prospective, 2) involved community-dwellers aged ≥60 years, 3) were published in the last 10 years, and 4) had as a concept vulnerability associated with the health of the older population. A total of 833 studies were identified and screened, 26 of which were included. Most included studies addressed vulnerability in older adults as an individual aspect, whether biological or psychological. The remaining studies reported vulnerability as affecting socio-environmental, health care system, and multifactorial aspects. Therefore, the concept of “vulnerability in older people” was not properly defined in the biomedical scientific community. When we return to the guiding question of this review, we can conclude that the conditions of vulnerability of older people are being treated broadly and diversely, producing different methodological strategies. The systematic review was conducted in the United States National Library of Medicine (PubMed), Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature (LILACS), and Scientific Electronic Library Online (SciELO) databases between August and December 2020 and updated in September 2022, with registration number CRD42022361649.
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
14
审稿时长
24 weeks
×
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