SynthesisPloS one2022
Defining and researching the concept of resilience in LGBT+ later life: Findings from a mixed study systematic review.
Synthesis in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Within the literature, resilience is described as either a trait, an outcome or a process and no universal definition exists. A growing body of research shows that older LGBT+ adults show signs of resilience despite facing multiple inequalities that negatively impact their health and social wellbeing. The aim of this review was to examine how resilience is defined in LGBT+ ageing research and how it is studied. A mixed-study systematic search of peer-reviewed research papers published before June 2022 was conducted using the electronic databases CINAHL, Embase, Medline, PsycInfo, Social Science Database and Web of Science. This resulted in the screening of 7101 papers 27 of which matched the inclusion criteria. A quality appraisal was conducted using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. Findings show that papers often lack a clear definition of resilience and application of resilience theory within the studies, although many of the papers conceptualised resilience as either a trait, process or an outcome. However, resilience was rarely the primary focus of the studies and was researched using a variety of measurement instruments and conceptual frameworks. Given the socioeconomic disparities, diverse social relations, histories of discrimination and stigma, and acts of resistance that have shaped the lives of older LGBT+ populations, resilience is a topic of growing interest for researchers and practitioners. Clear definitions of resilience and application of resilience theory could help improve methods used to study the concept and lead to more robust findings and the development of effective interventions. Greater clarity on the concept of resilience could also broaden the focus of research that informs policies and practice, and support practitioner training in resilience and the particular experiences of older LGBT+ adults.
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.