ArticleEuropean geriatric medicine2024
Interdisciplinarity in cultural gerontology and geriatric medical humanities - a bibliometric survey.
Article in European geriatric medicine, 2024. 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCultural gerontology - understanding ageing through the lens of arts and humanities-has emerged as an important element of epistemology of ageing. As a boundary area between geriatric medicine/gerontology and arts/humanities disciplines, joint-working/interdisciplinarity is desirable. This project aims to assess the degree of joint-working manifested in cultural gerontology by authorship and acknowledgements in papers dedicated to cultural gerontology in five journals.
methodsObservational survey of authorship in 5 journals from the founding of the specific sections on cultural gerontology or specific dedicated journals, assessing number of authors, disciplinary identities, and evidence of joint working within cultural gerontology.
resultsOf 591 papers, 481 (81%) were single authors. There was a spread of disciplinary affiliations, 247 (41.8%) gerontology/age studies, 169 arts/humanities/social sciences (28.6%) and 133 of uncertain affiliation (22.5%): only 38 papers had a clear indication of joint working across the disciplines (6.4%). In the two geriatric medicine journals, European Geriatric Medicine and Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, authorship was almost exclusively from geriatric medicine/gerontology. There was extremely limited use of acknowledgements.
conclusionOur study indicates that single authorship is the most frequent mode of peer-reviewed publishing in cultural gerontology, whilst acknowledging that some authors may have scholarly training in multiple fields but are listed as unidisciplinary. Leaders in the field and editors of relevant journals/section need to consider ways of encouraging and recognising joint working, through fuller descriptions of multiple affiliations, brief author biographies, fuller use of acknowledgements and consideration of brief accompanying discussant responses from complementary disciplines.
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.