SynthesisBMC geriatrics2025
Scales used to assess ageism in the health care sector: a (COSMIN) systematic review of the measurement properties.
Synthesis in BMC geriatrics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- From midlife emergence to old-age divergence: an empirical study on structural gendered ageism in health service utilization in Tibet.International journal for equity in health · 2025Article
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
backgroundWe aimed to systematically assess the measurement properties of ageism scales tested in a population of health care professionals and students.
methodsEligible studies were peer-reviewed English language publications that sampled a population of health care professionals and/or students and focused on developing and/or evaluating at least one psychometric property of an ageism scale. A systematic review was conducted until 15th December 2023 via the following databases: PubMed, Embase, PsycInfo, and Scopus. Data extraction and quality assessment (including a risk of bias evaluation) of the included studies was undertaken by two reviewers in accordance with COSMIN guidelines.
resultsOut of 1,626 articles selected, 51 were eligible for inclusion reporting evidence on the measurement properties and/or on the development of eight ageism scales. Only five scales have been specifically developed for health care professionals or students. Furthermore, the available scales fail to cover all dimensions of ageism, with many focusing solely on stereotypes and the explicit and negative dimensions of ageism and less on the implicit dimension. Our review also revealed that the evidence was often of poor quality and limited to only a few psychometric properties. Finally, we found that the assessed scales had poor theoretical foundations.
conclusionsThis study emphasises the need to develop and validate a comprehensive scale that measures the complexity of ageism in the health care sector.
trial registrationPROSPERO registration CRD42021276470.
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.