SynthesisInquiry : a journal of medical care organization, provision and financing
Cross-National Comparisons of Cognitive and Physical Health in Older Adults Across China, Japan, and Korea: A Systematic Review.
Synthesis in Inquiry : a journal of medical care organization, provision and financing. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- A systematic review and meta-analysis of blood transfusion rates during liver resection by country.Annals of surgical treatment and research · 2023Article
- Developing a Cross-National Disability Measure for Older Adult Populations across Korea, China, and Japan.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCross-national studies are an emerging research area in public health. Specifically, cross-national health comparisons are important for understanding the factors driving the success or failure of public health policies. Therefore, this study systematically analyzed studies that compared health status (physical health and cognition) of the older adults using national panel data for three East Asian countries-China, Japan, and Korea.
methodsGoogle Scholar and PubMed were used for the literature search. The search strategy targeted papers published between 2005 and 2020, yielding a total of 2690 papers, of which seven were selected for the review. The Center for Evidence-Based Medicine (CEBM) criteria was used to assess study design quality. The risk of bias for non-randomized studies (RoBANS) tool, a quality assessment tool developed in Korea to evaluate non-randomized interventional studies, measured risk of bias.
resultsOf the seven included papers, two studies performed cognitive comparisons, four studies performed physical health comparisons, and one study compared both cognition and physical health. The studies selected for this study by CEBM criteria included four prospective cohort studies (Level 2B) and three expert opinions without explicit critical appraisal (Level 5). Risk of bias using the RoBANS tool found a risk of confounding variables in four out of seven papers. Finally, measurement items of cognitive and physical health differed across all three countries' panel surveys.
conclusionThese results suggest that in order to compare East Asian health policies according to the aging society, it is necessary to develop consistent cognitive and physical health evaluation tools in the future.
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.