Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37887658›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2023

"Caregiving Youth" and the Patchwork History of Recognition in the United States.

Elizabeth Olson, Leiha Edmonds

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

2 authors.

Elizabeth OlsonDepartment of Geography, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC 27599, USA.
Leiha EdmondsDepartment of Geography, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC 27599, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This article examines the U.S. legislative and policy landscape and its historical and contemporary recognition of young people as caregivers and their importance to public health, both as care providers and as a category of special concern for overall wellbeing. Drawing on feminist geographies of health to situate a historical analysis, we aim to answer two key questions: First, what is the history of recognition of caregiving youth in key moments of federal action to address family caregiving needs? Second, how might we use this history to better understand and analyze the patchwork geography of caregiving youth recognition in the U.S. and other countries that similarly lack formal national policy recognition to improve and enhance public health? We use the term patchwork to describe how federal recognition of caregiving youth in broader debates about public health is uneven across both time and space, and contingent upon civil society, non-profit organizations, and researchers working in and with geographically bound communities. Our results illustrate how a focus on the relationships of recognition, both in the past and the present and at local and national scales, reveals a different perspective on caregiving youth in the U.S. with a much more complex history than previously identified. The article describes how relationships established in the absence of federal policy or legislation are sometimes directed towards building more formal recognition, and other times with the goal of changing practices in a specific location.

Indexed as

CaregiversPolicyAdolescentHumansMotivationUnited Statescarecaregiving youthcritical health geographiesfeminist geographyhistoryUnited States

Identifiers

PMID37887658
PMCPMC10606694

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.