ReviewClinical interventions in aging2022
Interactions Between EIP on AHA Reference Sites and Action Groups to Foster Digital Innovation of Health and Care in European Regions.
Review in Clinical interventions in aging, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Ageing and Quality of Life in Older Adults: Updates and Perspectives of Psychosocial and Advanced Technological Interventions.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Innovation ecosystems in health and care: the Andalusian Reference Site as an example.Frontiers in medicine · 2024Article
- Digital Health Service for Identification of Frailty Risk Factors in Community-Dwelling Older Adults: The SUNFRAIL+ Study Protocol.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023Article
- Assessment Tools of Biopsychosocial Frailty Dimensions in Community-Dwelling Older Adults: A Narrative Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The article describes some of the achievements of the European Innovation Partnership on Active and Healthy Ageing (EIP on AHA), after eight years in operation. These results were achieved thanks to the collaborative work of the action groups (AGs) and reference sites (RSs). RS regional ecosystems include key organisations committed to investing in innovation to foster active and healthy ageing. The AGs are groups of professionals committed to sharing their knowledge and skills in active and healthy ageing. This article reports on the approach used by the EIP on AHA to bring together experts and regions in identifying and addressing these challenges. Synergies between AGs offered substantial support to RSs, allowing regional health and care priorities and challenges to be identified and pursued through AG commitments. Building upon the experiences of the EIP on AHA, the Reference Sites Collaborative Network has set up a number of thematic action groups that bring together multidisciplinary experts from across Europe to address the main health and social care challenges at regional, national and European level.
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.