Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34272964›Full record

ArticleThe Gerontologist2021

"We Should Be at the Back of the Line": A Frame Analysis of Old Age Within the Distribution Order of the COVID-19 Vaccine.

Laura D Allen, Idalina Z Odziemczyk, Jolanta Perek-Białas, Liat Ayalon

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The Gerontologist, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

4 authors.

Laura D AllenLouis and Gabi Weisfeld School of Social Work, Faculty of Social Sciences, Bar-Ilan University, Ramat Gan, Israel.ORCID 0000-0002-5251-5677
Idalina Z OdziemczykDoctoral School in the Social Sciences (Sociological Sciences), Jagellonian University, Cracow, Poland.ORCID 0000-0001-6752-064X
Jolanta Perek-BiałasInstitute of Sociology and Center of Evaluation and Public Policy Analysis, Jagiellonian University, Cracow, Poland.ORCID 0000-0003-4215-9565
Liat AyalonLouis and Gabi Weisfeld School of Social Work, Faculty of Social Sciences, Bar-Ilan University, Ramat Gan, Israel.ORCID 0000-0003-3339-7879

Funding

Marie Skłodowska-Curie 764632
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND

objectivesIn the fall of 2020, it became clear that the initial doses of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine would be limited, and a priority order would be necessary. This article examines the perceptions of old age in the context of establishing a priority order for the COVID-19 vaccine from the perspective of online newspaper commenters. Two research questions are investigated: (a) How do commenters place older people in line for the COVID-19 vaccine? and (b) What frames and factors do commenters use as reasoning for their proposed position of older adults? RESEARCH DESIGN AND

methodsThis study involves a frame analysis of 440 online comments on an article published by The New York Times on December 1, 2020 about the U.S. recommendations for distributing the coronavirus vaccine.

resultsOlder adults were referenced as belonging to one of the 3 groups: older long-term care residents, older workers, and older adults retired and/or isolating at home. Two frames emerged from the data as criteria for prioritization: social contribution and vulnerability. Older commenters themselves frequently stated that they should be deprioritized so that others can be inoculated earlier. DISCUSSION AND IMPLICATIONS: The findings may be interpreted as demonstrative of pervasive ageism throughout the pandemic; older commenters' sacrificial remarks may reflect generativity, internalized ageism, social pressure from online forums, or some combination thereof.

Indexed as

AgeismCOVID-19AgedCOVID-19 VaccinesHumansPandemicsSARS-CoV-2COVID-19 VaccinesAgeismFrame analysisInternet-based dataSocial contributionVulnerability

Identifiers

PMID34272964
PMCPMC8411381

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.