Ageism and COVID-19: what does our society's response say about us?

The goal of this commentary is to highlight the ageism that has emerged during the COVID-19 pandemic. Over 20 international researchers in the field of ageing have contributed to this document. This commentary discusses how older people are misrepresented and undervalued in the current public discourse surrounding the pandemic. It points to issues in documenting the deaths of older adults, the lack of preparation for such a crisis in long-term care homes, how some 'protective' policies can be considered patronising and how the initial perception of the public was that the virus was really an older adult problem. This commentary also calls attention to important intergenerational solidarity that has occurred during this crisis to ensure support and social-inclusion of older adults, even at a distance. Our hope is that with this commentary we can contribute to the discourse on older adults during this pandemic and diminish the ageist attitudes that have circulated.

Global reach of ageism on older persons' health: A systematic review

Objective

Although there is anecdotal evidence of ageism occurring at both the structural level (in which societal institutions reinforce systematic bias against older persons) and individual level (in which older persons take in the negative views of aging of their culture), previous systematic reviews have not examined how both levels simultaneously influence health. Thus, the impact of ageism may be underestimated. We hypothesized that a comprehensive systematic review would reveal that these ageism levels adversely impact the health of older persons across geography, health outcomes, and time.

Method

A literature search was performed using 14 databases with no restrictions on region, language, and publication type. The systematic search yielded 13,691 papers for screening, 638 for full review, and 422 studies for analyses. Sensitivity analyses that adjusted for sample size and study quality were conducted using standardized tools. The study protocol is registered (PROSPERO CRD42018090857).

Results

Ageism led to significantly worse health outcomes in 95.5% of the studies and 74.0% of the 1,159 ageism-health associations examined. The studies reported ageism effects in all 45 countries, 11 health domains, and 25 years studied, with the prevalence of significant findings increasing over time (p < .0001). A greater prevalence of significant ageism-health findings was found in less-developed countries than more-developed countries (p = .0002). Older persons who were less educated were particularly likely to experience adverse health effects of ageism. Evidence of ageism was found across the age, sex, and race/ethnicity of the targeters (i.e., persons perpetrating ageism).

Conclusion

The current analysis which included over 7 million participants is the most comprehensive review of health consequences of ageism to date. Considering that the analysis revealed that the detrimental impact of ageism on older persons’ health has been occurring simultaneously at the structural and individual level in five continents, our systematic review demonstrates the pernicious reach of ageism.

Discrimination and drinking: A systematic review of the evidence

Although it is widely accepted that discrimination is associated with heavy and hazardous drinking, particularly within stress and coping frameworks, there has been no comprehensive review of the evidence. In response, we conducted a systematic review of the English language peer-reviewed literature to summarize studies of discrimination and alcohol-related outcomes, broadly defined. Searching six online data bases, we identified 938 non-duplicative titles published between 1980 and 2015, of which 97 met all inclusion criteria for our review and reported quantitative tests of associations between discrimination and alcohol use. We extracted key study characteristics and assessed quality based on reported methodological details. Papers generally supported a positive association; however, the quantity and quality of evidence varied considerably. The largest number of studies was of racial/ethnic discrimination among African Americans in the United States, followed by sexual orientation and gender discrimination. Studies of racial/ethnic discrimination were notable for their frequent use of complex modeling (i.e., mediation, moderation) but focused nearly exclusively on interpersonal discrimination. In contrast, studies of sexual orientation discrimination (i.e., heterosexism, homophobia) examined both internalized and interpersonal aspects; however, the literature largely relied on global tests of association using cross-sectional data. Some populations (e.g., Native Americans, Asian and Pacific Islanders) and types of discrimination (e.g., systemic/structural racism; ageism) received scant attention. This review extends our knowledge of a key social determinant of health through alcohol use. We identified gaps in the evidence base and suggest directions for future research related to discrimination and alcohol misuse.

Discrimination in Healthcare Settings is Associated with Disability in Older Adults: Health and Retirement Study, 2008-2012

BACKGROUND

As our society ages, improving medical care for an older population will be crucial. Discrimination in healthcare may contribute to substandard experiences with the healthcare system, increasing the burden of poor health in older adults. Few studies have focused on the presence of healthcare discrimination and its effects on older adults.

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to examine the relationship between healthcare discrimination and new or worsened disability.

DESIGN

This was a longitudinal analysis of data from the nationally representative Health and Retirement Study administered in 2008 with follow-up through 2012.

PARTICIPANTS

Six thousand and seventeen adults over the age of 50 years (mean age 67 years, 56.3 % female, 83.1 % white) were included in this study.

MAIN MEASURES

Healthcare discrimination assessed by a 2008 report of receiving poorer service or treatment than other people by doctors or hospitals (never, less than a year=infrequent; more than once a year=frequent). Outcome was self-report of new or worsened disability by 2012 (difficulty or dependence in any of six activities of daily living). We used a Cox proportional hazards model adjusting for age, race/ethnicity, gender, net worth, education, depression, high blood pressure, diabetes, cancer, lung disease, heart disease, stroke, and healthcare utilization in the past 2 years.

KEY RESULTS

In all, 12.6 % experienced discrimination infrequently and 5.9 % frequently. Almost one-third of participants (29 %) reporting frequent healthcare discrimination developed new or worsened disability over 4 years, compared to 16.8 % of those who infrequently and 14.7 % of those who never experienced healthcare discrimination (p < 0.001). In multivariate analyses, compared to no discrimination, frequent healthcare discrimination was associated with new or worsened disability over 4 years (aHR = 1.63, 95 % CI 1.16-2.27).

CONCLUSIONS

One out of five adults over the age of 50 years experiences discrimination in healthcare settings. One in 17 experience frequent healthcare discrimination, and this is associated with new or worsened disability by 4 years. Future research should focus on the mechanisms by which healthcare discrimination influences disability in older adults to promote better health outcomes for an aging population.

An inconvenienced youth? Ageism and its potential intergenerational roots

Age is the only social category identifying subgroups that everyone may eventually join. Despite this and despite the well-known growth of the older population, age-based prejudice remains an understudied topic in social psychology. This article systematically reviews the literature on ageism, highlighting extant research on its consequences and theoretical perspectives on its causes. We then identify a crucial gap in the literature, potential intergenerational tensions, speculating how a growing-older population-and society's efforts to accommodate it-might stoke intergenerational fires, particularly among the younger generation. Presenting both sides of this incipient issue, we review relevant empirical work that introduces reasons for both optimism and pessimism concerning intergenerational relations within an aging society. We conclude by suggesting future avenues for ageism research, emphasizing the importance of understanding forthcoming intergenerational dynamics for the benefit of the field and broader society.