Roman Kaspar, Hans-Jörg Ehni, Mark Schweda, Hans-Werner Wahl
{"title":"在多个大型数据基础设施中对高龄个体的成功老龄化情境丰富模型进行测试。","authors":"Roman Kaspar, Hans-Jörg Ehni, Mark Schweda, Hans-Werner Wahl","doi":"10.1093/geront/gnae117","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and objectives: </strong>Few people who are ages 80+ meet the criteria of successful aging (SA) proposed by Rowe and Kahn. Going beyond the individual-level conceptualization, we argue that SA always operates in multiple contexts and that context may become most critical in advanced old age. However, we are not aware of any previous study providing an empirical test of how contexts for SA unfold across persons 80 years and older, including those living in institutions.</p><p><strong>Research design and methods: </strong>We estimated and compared prevalences of successful aging based on a classic versus context-enriched understanding of SA in multiple large surveys of older adults, i.e., the D80+ study (N = 3.233) and the NRW80+ study (N [baseline] = 1.863). In addition to replication across independent samples, we investigated the stability of context-related SA across time.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Prevalences of SA according to Rowe and Kahn were 9.1% in adults aged 80-84 and 0.7% in persons 90 years or older. However, prevalence rates for those with good contexts at their disposal even if not fulfilling Rowe and Kahn's criteria were much higher across all age groups (80-84 years: 54.9%, 90 years and older: 44.4%). Greater two-year stability was observed for contextual compared to individual criteria. Notably, positive effects of context on SA were stronger at onset compared to late fourth age.</p><p><strong>Discussion and implications: </strong>Our findings support a contextualized understanding of SA and inform policy that furthering SA in the fourth age requires the optimization of multiple contexts at the community level.</p>","PeriodicalId":51347,"journal":{"name":"Gerontologist","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Testing a Context-Enriched Model of Successful Aging in Multiple Large Data Infrastructures with Individuals in Advanced Old Age.\",\"authors\":\"Roman Kaspar, Hans-Jörg Ehni, Mark Schweda, Hans-Werner Wahl\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/geront/gnae117\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background and objectives: </strong>Few people who are ages 80+ meet the criteria of successful aging (SA) proposed by Rowe and Kahn. Going beyond the individual-level conceptualization, we argue that SA always operates in multiple contexts and that context may become most critical in advanced old age. However, we are not aware of any previous study providing an empirical test of how contexts for SA unfold across persons 80 years and older, including those living in institutions.</p><p><strong>Research design and methods: </strong>We estimated and compared prevalences of successful aging based on a classic versus context-enriched understanding of SA in multiple large surveys of older adults, i.e., the D80+ study (N = 3.233) and the NRW80+ study (N [baseline] = 1.863). In addition to replication across independent samples, we investigated the stability of context-related SA across time.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Prevalences of SA according to Rowe and Kahn were 9.1% in adults aged 80-84 and 0.7% in persons 90 years or older. However, prevalence rates for those with good contexts at their disposal even if not fulfilling Rowe and Kahn's criteria were much higher across all age groups (80-84 years: 54.9%, 90 years and older: 44.4%). Greater two-year stability was observed for contextual compared to individual criteria. Notably, positive effects of context on SA were stronger at onset compared to late fourth age.</p><p><strong>Discussion and implications: </strong>Our findings support a contextualized understanding of SA and inform policy that furthering SA in the fourth age requires the optimization of multiple contexts at the community level.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":51347,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Gerontologist\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Gerontologist\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/geront/gnae117\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"GERONTOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Gerontologist","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/geront/gnae117","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"GERONTOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
背景和目的:很少有 80 岁以上的人符合 Rowe 和 Kahn 提出的成功老龄化(SA)标准。超越个人层面的概念,我们认为成功老龄化总是在多种背景下发生作用,而背景在高龄时可能变得最为关键。然而,我们还没有发现有任何研究对 80 岁及以上的老年人(包括生活在养老机构中的老年人)如何展开成功老龄化环境进行了实证检验:我们在多个大型老年人调查中,即 D80+ 研究(N = 3.233)和 NRW80+ 研究(N [baseline] = 1.863)中,根据对 SA 的经典理解和丰富的背景理解,估算并比较了成功老龄化的流行率。除了在独立样本中进行复制外,我们还调查了与情境相关的自闭症在不同时期的稳定性:根据 Rowe 和 Kahn 的研究,80-84 岁成年人的 SA 患病率为 9.1%,90 岁或以上老年人的患病率为 0.7%。然而,在所有年龄组中,即使不符合 Rowe 和 Kahn 的标准,但拥有良好环境的人群的 SA 患病率要高得多(80-84 岁:54.9%;90 岁及以上:44.4%)。与个人标准相比,情境标准的两年稳定性更高。值得注意的是,与晚期相比,情境对 SA 的积极影响在发病时更强:我们的研究结果支持对自闭症的情境化理解,并为政策提供了信息,即在第四个年龄段推进自闭症需要在社区层面优化多种情境。
Testing a Context-Enriched Model of Successful Aging in Multiple Large Data Infrastructures with Individuals in Advanced Old Age.
Background and objectives: Few people who are ages 80+ meet the criteria of successful aging (SA) proposed by Rowe and Kahn. Going beyond the individual-level conceptualization, we argue that SA always operates in multiple contexts and that context may become most critical in advanced old age. However, we are not aware of any previous study providing an empirical test of how contexts for SA unfold across persons 80 years and older, including those living in institutions.
Research design and methods: We estimated and compared prevalences of successful aging based on a classic versus context-enriched understanding of SA in multiple large surveys of older adults, i.e., the D80+ study (N = 3.233) and the NRW80+ study (N [baseline] = 1.863). In addition to replication across independent samples, we investigated the stability of context-related SA across time.
Results: Prevalences of SA according to Rowe and Kahn were 9.1% in adults aged 80-84 and 0.7% in persons 90 years or older. However, prevalence rates for those with good contexts at their disposal even if not fulfilling Rowe and Kahn's criteria were much higher across all age groups (80-84 years: 54.9%, 90 years and older: 44.4%). Greater two-year stability was observed for contextual compared to individual criteria. Notably, positive effects of context on SA were stronger at onset compared to late fourth age.
Discussion and implications: Our findings support a contextualized understanding of SA and inform policy that furthering SA in the fourth age requires the optimization of multiple contexts at the community level.
期刊介绍:
The Gerontologist, published since 1961, is a bimonthly journal of The Gerontological Society of America that provides a multidisciplinary perspective on human aging by publishing research and analysis on applied social issues. It informs the broad community of disciplines and professions involved in understanding the aging process and providing care to older people. Articles should include a conceptual framework and testable hypotheses. Implications for policy or practice should be highlighted. The Gerontologist publishes quantitative and qualitative research and encourages manuscript submissions of various types including: research articles, intervention research, review articles, measurement articles, forums, and brief reports. Book and media reviews, International Spotlights, and award-winning lectures are commissioned by the editors.