Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34008783›Full record

ArticleRevista de saude publica2021

Older adult health and primary care: autonomy, vulnerabilities and challenges of care.

Jeane Lima E Silva Carneiro, José Ricardo de Carvalho Mesquita Ayres

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article 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 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
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

2 authors.

Jeane Lima E Silva CarneiroUniversidade São Paulo. Faculdade de Medicina da Universidade de São Paulo. Programa de Pós-Graduação em Saúde Coletiva, São Paulo, SP, Brasil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2778-0305
José Ricardo de Carvalho Mesquita AyresUniversidade de São Paulo. Faculdade de Medicina da Universidade de São Paulo. Departamento de Medicina Preventiva, São Paulo, SP, Brasil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5225-6492

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo understand the relations between autonomy and health-disease-care processes of older adults in the daily life of primary health care.

methodsQualitative research developed in 2019, in a primary health unit in the central region of the city of São Paulo, using participant observation and in-depth interviews with 16 health professionals and 8 older adults. The construction and interpretation of the narratives produced in the study were guided by the perspective of Gadamer's philosophical hermeneutics and Ricoeur's theory of interpretation. The theoretical framework of vulnerability/Careᵃ, as proposed by Ayres, guided the definition of the study and interpretative categories.

resultsClosely related to the difficulties, facilities and strategies to cope with the daily challenges in the health care of older adults, autonomy was an important marker of vulnerability (interpersonal, social and programmatic), indicating areas that require special attention, such as drug dispensing, urban mobility, social isolation, financial frailties and adequacy of service routines.

conclusionDistinctly from an individual attribute, autonomy has proved to be the expression of relational characteristics, requiring plural and flexible practical-moral strategies, techniques and horizons, although always guided by the same ethical commitment to respect the singular needs of individuals.

Indexed as

Delivery of Health CarePrimary Health CareAgedBrazilHermeneuticsHumansQualitative Research

Identifiers

PMID34008783
PMCPMC8102029

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.