Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34258692›Full record

ArticleHistory and philosophy of the life sciences2021

Ageism in the COVID-19 pandemic: age-based discrimination in triage decisions and beyond.

Jon Rueda

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in History and philosophy of the life sciences, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed
–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

14 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 'The Norm Is to Not Openly Collaborate': Using the Lens of Co-Production to Evaluate the Development of a COVID-19 ICU Triage Policy.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2024
    Article
  4. Marital Status and Happiness During the COVID-19 Pandemic.Journal of marriage and the family · 2024
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. 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

1 author.

Jon RuedaDepartment of Philosophy 1 and FiloLab-UGR Scientific Unit of Excellence, University of Granada, Granada, Spain. ruetxe@ugr.es.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5789-7515

Funding

"la Caixa" Foundation LCF/BQ/DR20/11790005
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Ageism has unfortunately become a salient phenomenon during the COVID-19 pandemic. In particular, triage decisions based on age have been hotly discussed. In this article, I first defend that, although there are ethical reasons (founded on the principles of benefit and fairness) to consider the age of patients in triage dilemmas, using age as a categorical exclusion is an unjustifiable ageist practice. Then, I argue that ageism during the pandemic has been fueled by media narratives and unfair assumptions which have led to an ethically problematic group homogenization of the older population. Finally, I conclude that an intersectional perspective can shed light on further controversies on ageism and triage in the post-pandemic future.

Indexed as

AgeismCOVID-19HumansSARS-CoV-2TriageAgeismCOVID-19Triage

Identifiers

PMID34258692
PMCPMC8276843

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.