Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35309519›Full record

ArticleJournal of human rights and social work2022

Second Time Overlooked in Crisis: Examining How HIV/AID Health Policies in the USA Connect with Policy Implications Today for Aging LGBTQ Adults During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Breana Bietsch

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of human rights and social work, 2022. 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
2.0field-weighted citation impact, top 14% of its field
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, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  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

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

Breana BietschUniversity of Connecticut, Social Work, Hartford, CT USA.ORCID 0000-0002-9285-5529
University of Connecticut · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

U.S. policy has, once again, overlooked the health care needs of older adults who are lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer or questioning (LGBTQ). This population is estimated to more than double in the USA (Fredriksen-Goldsen, in Generations 38(4), 86-92, 2015), with estimates of approximately 3 million LGBTQ adults over 50 currently and 7 million by 2030 (Services and Advocacy for GBLT Elders in SAGE, New York, 2018). The healthcare model for addressing the needs of LGBTQ persons has historically been that of a disease model of care, particularly during the HIV/AIDS crisis, and has recently moved to that of a health equity model in the past 20 years. The LGBTQ community, social work profession, and general medical community worked to create the health care equity model we have today and this paper will discuss how this evolved. The health care equity model addresses the health needs for older adult LGBTQ populations. Older LGBTQ adults are more likely to experience elevated rates of chronic conditions (such as HIV, cancer, diabetes), higher prevalence of anxiety/depression, greater substance abuse, higher economic insecurities, limited community resources, and limited access to health care services compared to heterosexual/cisgender counterparts. This paper discusses how health disparities among this minority population and heterosexual/cisgender individuals have been exacerbated during the COVID-19 pandemic. Further, this paper will address policy, research, and practice implications to understand how to assist this vulnerable subpopulation of LGBTQ persons.

Indexed as

COVID-19Health disparitiesHIV/AIDSOlder adult LGBTQ populationsPolicy implications

Identifiers

PMID35309519
PMCPMC8922067
OpenAlexW4220877247

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.