ReviewResearch on aging2019
The State of Theory in LGBTQ Aging: Implications for Gerontological Scholarship.
Review in Research on aging, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Defining and researching the concept of resilience in LGBT+ later life: Findings from a mixed study systematic review.PloS one · 2022Pooled it
- Inequalities in Health and Care Among Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual People Aged 50 and Older in the United Kingdom: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Sources of Individual Participant Data.The journals of gerontology. Series B, Psychological sciences and social sciences · 2020Pooled it
- Queer Gerontology: Principles for Advancing Rigor and Justice.The Gerontologist · 2025Article
- Queer Aging: Older Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual Adults' Visions of Late Life.Innovation in aging · 2023Article
- Successful Aging Among Older LGBTQIA+ People: Future Research and Implications.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Social research in lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (LGBTQ) aging is a rapidly growing field, but an examination of the use of theory has not yet been conducted for its impact on the field's direction. We conducted a systematic review of empirical articles published in LGBTQ aging in the years 2009-2017 ( N = 102). Using a typology of theory use in scholarly articles, we analyzed these articles for the types of theories being used, the degree to which theories were used in each article, and the analytical function they served. We found that 52% of articles consistently applied theory, 23% implied or partially applied theory, and 25% presented as atheoretical. A wide range of theories were used and served multiple analytical functions such as concept development and explanation of findings. We discuss the strengths and weaknesses of theory use in this body of literature, especially with respect to implications for future knowledge development in the field.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.