Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33886953›Full record

ReviewRevista de saude publica2021

Ageism against older adults in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic: an integrative review.

Marcela Fernandes Silva, Diego Salvador Muniz da Silva, Aldiane Gomes de Macedo Bacurau, Priscila Maria Stolses Bergamo Francisco, Daniela de Assumpção, Anita Liberalesso Neri, Flávia Silva Arbex Borim

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Revista de saude publica, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

22 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Ageism toward older adults among healthcare workers and students: A scoping review.International journal of nursing studies advances · 2026
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Perceptions of ageism among undergraduate nursing students.Revista da Escola de Enfermagem da U S P · 2026
    Article
  6. Review
  7. Observational
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Bidirectional Associations of Awareness of Age-Related Change and Attitudes Toward Own Aging With Social Media Use.The journals of gerontology. Series B, Psychological sciences and social sciences · 2023
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. The Impact of COVID-19 on Nursing Homes: Study Design and Population Description.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Addressing Ageism-Be Active in Aging: Study Protocol.Journal of personalized medicine · 2022
    Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Marcela Fernandes SilvaUniversidade Estadual de Campinas. Faculdade de Ciências Médicas. Departamento de Gerontologia. Campinas, SP, Brasil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5688-2095
Diego Salvador Muniz da SilvaUniversidade Estadual de Campinas. Faculdade de Ciências Médicas. Departamento de Gerontologia. Campinas, SP, Brasil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2525-0754
Aldiane Gomes de Macedo BacurauUniversidade Estadual de Campinas. Faculdade de Ciências Médicas. Departamento de Saúde Coletiva. Campinas, SP, Brasil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6671-2284
Priscila Maria Stolses Bergamo FranciscoUniversidade Estadual de Campinas. Faculdade de Ciências Médicas. Departamento de Gerontologia. Campinas, SP, Brasil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7361-9961
Daniela de AssumpçãoUniversidade Estadual de Campinas. Faculdade de Ciências Médicas. Departamento de Gerontologia. Campinas, SP, Brasil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1813-996X
Anita Liberalesso NeriUniversidade Estadual de Campinas. Faculdade de Ciências Médicas. Departamento de Gerontologia. Campinas, SP, Brasil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6833-7668
Flávia Silva Arbex BorimUniversidade Estadual de Campinas. Faculdade de Ciências Médicas. Departamento de Gerontologia. Campinas, SP, Brasil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7316-1145

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo report the main results of studies on prejudice, stereotyping, and age-based discrimination (ageism) in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic.

methodsThis is an integrative review of the literature on ageism in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, conducted between May and June 2020, with data collected from the following databases: Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online (MEDLINE/PubMed), Web of Science (Thompson Reuters), Scopus (Elsevier Science), Literatura Latino-Americana e do Caribe em Ciências da Saúde (Lilacs) and Scientific Eletronic Library Online (SciELO).

resultsTwenty-one publications addressing ageism during the pandemics, its origins, consequences, and ethical and political implications were analyzed. All publications were theoretical with a critical/reflexive approach, being 90,5% opinion articles (n = 19) and 9,5% research (n = 2). The main findings indicate criticisms regarding resources allocation and intensive care based exclusively on age. The results also highlight the impacts of social isolation, the use of technologies and social media, and intergenerational relationships within the COVID-19 scenario.

conclusionAccording to most publications, although ageism has always been present, it became more evident during the COVID-19 pandemic as a form of discrimination against older adults. "Ageist" discourses may exert a negative influence in older adults' lives, causing severe social and psychological impacts.

Indexed as

AgeismCOVID-19AgedBrazilHumansPandemicsSARS-CoV-2

Identifiers

PMID33886953
PMCPMC8023321

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.