Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41324693›Full record

ArticleZeitschrift fur Gerontologie und Geriatrie2026

[Protection practices in day centers for older adults : Social scientific perspectives].

Milena Feldmann

Abstract readEnglish Abstract
In one paragraph

Article in Zeitschrift fur Gerontologie und Geriatrie, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

1 author.

Milena FeldmannEmmy-Noether-Gruppe "Linking Ages", Goethe-Universität Frankfurt am Main, Eschersheimer Landstraße 121, 60322, Frankfurt am Main, Deutschland. feldmann@soz.uni-frankfurt.de.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWhile institutional protection concepts in child and youth welfare are legally established, there are no comparable regulations for facilities for older adults. RESEARCH QUESTION: This study examined who is protected in day care centers for older adults, how they are protected and from what. MATERIAL AND

methodsFocus group interviews with management personnel were evaluated using constructivist grounded theory to record protection practices and their perception in the facilities.

resultsProtection practices are not only directed at older people but also at employees. The protection measures described range from everyday borderline situations to sexualized violence. Protection concepts are perceived as particularly helpful in serious cases, while team communication is described as effective in smaller transgression situations.

Indexed as

Adult Day Care CentersElder AbuseAgedAged, 80 and overAttitude of Health PersonnelFemaleFocus GroupsGermanyHumansMaleMiddle AgedAge studiesDay care centerOlder adultsProtectionSexualized violence

Identifiers

PMID41324693
PMCPMC13538219

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.