<p><strong>Objective</strong>: Development of a new framework for the National Institute on Aging (NIA) to assess progress and opportunities toward stimulating and supporting rigorous research to address health disparities.</p><p><strong>Design:</strong> Portfolio review of NIA’s health disparities research portfolio to evaluate NIA’s progress in addressing priority health<br />disparities areas.<br /><strong></strong></p><p><strong>Results:</strong> The NIA Health DisparitiesResearch Framework highlights important factors for health disparities research related to aging, provides an organizing structure for tracking progress, stimulates opportunities to better delineate causal pathways and broadens the scope for malleable targets for intervention, aiding in our efforts to address health disparities in the aging population.<br /><strong></strong></p><p><strong>Conclusions:</strong> The promise of health disparitiesresearch depends largely on scientific rigor that builds on past findings and aggressively pursues new approaches. The NIA Health Disparities Framework provides a landscape for stimulating interdisciplinary<br />approaches, evaluating research productivity and identifying opportunities for innovative health disparities research related to<br />aging. <em>Ethn Dis.</em> 2015;25(3):245-254.</p>

The 2012 National Plan to Address Alzheimer’s Disease set an ambitious goal: to both prevent and effectively treat Alzheimer’s disease by 2025. To reach this goal, tens of thousands of volunteers will be needed to participate in clinical trials to test promising new interventions and therapies. To mobilize these volunteers and their health care providers to participate in future clinical trials, it will be necessary to achieve a better understanding of the barriers keeping people from participating in Alzheimer’s research; form innovative partnerships among researchers, health care and social service providers, and the public; and develop more-effective outreach strategies. In this article we explore recruitment issues, including those unique to Alzheimer’s studies, and we suggest concrete steps such as establishing a structured consortium linking all of the registries of Alzheimer’s trials and establishing new partnerships with community and local organizations that can build trust and understanding among patients, caregivers, and providers.

Our susceptibility to disease increases as we grow older. Robert Butler and colleagues argue that interventions to slow down ageing could therefore have much greater benefit than those targeted at individual disease

Purpose: This exploratory study used a set of four obstacle constructs derived from both the existing literature and our earlier work to describe the diverse end-of-life scenarios observed for a group of residents in a long-term care facility. Design and Methods: Data from a retrospective chart review and both quantitative and qualitative methods of data collection and analysis were used to examine in-depth the end-of-life experiences of all nursing home residents ( N ϭ 41) who died on the nursing care unit of a large continuing care retirement community during an 18-month period. Results: A hierarchy of obstacles to palliation and end-of-life care seems to exist in long-term care settings that begins with the lack of recognition that restorative, rehabilitative, or curative treatment futility has commenced. The next three obstacles in sequence include lack of communication among decision makers, no agreement on a course of care, and failure to implement a timely plan of care. Implications: The findings highlight the importance of determining treatment futility as an initial step in the successful delivery of palliative and end-oflife care to residents in long-term care followed by the need for a deliberate and proactive series of actions and care planning processes.

Transitions from active curative care to palliative care are important for residents in permanent long-term care placements. Improved end-of-life care requires more attention to these transitions and to the decisions that residents, their families, and care teams are called upon to make.

This is a report of a controlled, prospective, longitudinal trial of an intervention to affect medical students' attitudes toward aging. Members of the Class of 2002 at the University of Oklahoma College of Medicine were assigned a senior mentor (a community-dwelling older person) upon matriculation into medical school. Students were required to perform a structured interview with the mentor once per semester for the first 2 preclinical years and to discuss these interviews in small groups mediated by geriatrics faculty. Members of the Class of 2001 were controls. Attitudes toward aging were determined using the Aging Semantic Differential (ASD) attitude scale in August 1998 and again at the end of the second year of medical school. Initial mean ASD scores were not significantly different for the two groups. Although both classes experienced improvements in their ASD scores from Time 0 to Time 1, the improvement for the class of 2002 was significantly greater than that for the class of 2001 (2001 class mean = 0.17, 2002 class mean = 0.40, t = -3.09, degrees of freedom (df) = 219, P =.002). This difference held up under controls for sex, age, prior visits to a nursing home, prior work/volunteering in an old-age environment, and a prior course on aging (Model F = 3.00, df = 6/214, P =.008; class F = 9.70, df = 1, P =.002). It was concluded that a low-intensity intervention to introduce entering medical students to healthy older people might have a positive effect on attitudes toward aging.

No abstract

In the United States, the population aged 65 and older is rapidly growing, and this group uses more healthcare resources and has unique healthcare needs that do not exist in younger populations. However, it was reported that older adults are excluded or underrepresented in clinical trials for several diseases. We examined phase III clinical trials funded by the National Institutes of Health found in http://www.clinicaltrials.gov from 1965 to 2015 that addressed top causes for hospitalization and/or disability‐adjusted life years in older adults: congestive heart failure (n = 45), cardiac dysrhythmias (n = 24), coronary atherosclerosis (n = 106), heart attack (n = 76), stroke (n = 113), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (n = 14), pneumonia (n = 48), lung cancer (n = 117), prostate cancer (n = 65), and osteoarthritis (n = 15). We then analyzed the representation of older adults in these studies. We found that 33% of studies had arbitrary upper age limits, and 67% of studies reported mean and/or median ages that skewed younger than expected for the disease or condition of interest. Beyond explicit exclusion by age, older adults were often implicitly excluded based on various comorbid conditions such as polypharmacy/concomitant medication (37%) or cardiac issues (30%). We conclude that outcomes of these trials may not be fully generalizable to the general population of older adults. J Am Geriatr Soc 67:218–222, 2019.