ReviewInternational journal of nursing studies advances2026
Ageism toward older adults among healthcare workers and students: A scoping review.
Review in International journal of nursing studies advances, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Ignoring the Older Person's Voice: Dignity, Ageism, and Epistemic Injustice in Geriatric Nursing Practice-A Nursing-Oriented Conceptual Review and Practice Framework.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Attitudes of undergraduate nursing students toward caring for older adults: a cross-sectional study from Limpopo Province, South Africa.BMC geriatrics · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Ageism, particularly against older adults, is widespread in different settings, including public policies, healthcare institutions, workplaces and media. Its pervasive presence, especially in healthcare settings, has caused a significant impact on the economics and healthcare expenses and has become a growing concern. Older adults' health outcomes are impacted by both positive and negative ageism displayed by healthcare workers and students. Although multiple reviews have studied ageism in healthcare, literature mapping the presence of both positive and negative ageism among healthcare workers and students while synthesizing current interventions remains lacking. Objective: This scoping review aims to map the presence of both positive and negative ageism among healthcare workers and students as well as synthesise the current types of interventions that address ageism among HCWs and students and its outcome. Methods: This scoping review followed Arksey and O'Malley's five-step methodology. A total of 156 studies were included. Results: The included studies comprise 134 quantitative, 14 qualitative and 8 mixed-method studies. Most studies are conducted in high-income countries, while none of them are conducted in low-income countries. The majority are mainly focusing on the nursing profession and nursing students. Furthermore, almost two-thirds of the included studies are particularly looking at healthcare students. The findings show that almost half of the healthcare workers and students have positive ageism toward older adults. Surprisingly, only about 10 % reported negative ageism. Mixed, neutral and inconclusive presence of ageism are also reported. Various interventions have been adopted to tackle ageism, such as courses and curriculum interventions, clinical experience, intergenerational interaction, mentoring, simulation and psychological training. In addition, this scoping review highlights the need to develop a comprehensive scale to measure ageism accurately and evaluate existing interventions. Implication: Future studies should focus more on underrepresented regions such as low-income countries, Southeast Asia, and Africa. At the same time, to improve comparability across different studies, a widely accepted tool for evaluating both positive and negative ageism needs to be developed.
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.