With the article in this issue of JAGS by Mody et al.,1 we initiate an important new series on clinical aging research methods. Older adults are more likely to suffer from multiple diseases, take more medications, undergo more procedures, and use more health care than any other age group,2,3 yet the evidence base for care of the older adult is frequently derived from studies of younger, less complex populations.4–8 This discrepancy between the evidence and the population to which it is applied can be attributed to numerous conceptual and pragmatic challenges in clinical research methodology. Clinical investigators within and beyond the field of geriatrics have developed new approaches and creative strategies to overcome such challenges, but these solutions are often not explicitly presented in research manuscripts and are not widely known. One of the core missions of the American Geriatrics Society (AGS) and the Journal of the American Geriatrics Society (JAGS) is to promote evidence based care for older adults that results in better quality of life and functional independence.9 Thus, it is incumbent on us to disseminate knowledge that will help to generate that evidence.
The goal of this new research series is to examine the ways that clinical research methodologies create barriers to increasing the evidence base for care of the older adult and to describe solutions based on thoughtful application of new and emerging research concepts and practices. Traditionally, the standards for rigorous research and evidence were designed to elucidate the causes and treatment of isolated diseases. These traditional design assumptions do not work well in aging, and alternative approaches are needed.10 The focus of the research question changes as chronic illnesses accumulate and interact with aging; healthcare research must incorporate new paradigms to understand the underlying contributors to disease,11 multisystem problems such as geriatric syndromes,12 and the importance of outcomes such as function and quality of life.13–15 The new concepts and approaches developed by clinical investigators in the field of aging permit study of this broader and more-relevant range of research questions and increase the repertoire of methods to manage the complexity of including older adults in research. We hope that the articles in this series will be useful to healthcare providers, investigators, health professions trainees, proposal reviewers, grant sponsors, and policy makers, all of whom depend on the creation and use of evidence to provide the best care to older adults.
Each article in this series will focus on a type of challenge or barrier in clinical aging research. Using examples from the literature, the article will explain how the problem affects the creation of evidence and will present a repertoire of established and novel strategies to prevent or manage it. Several of the articles will be based on the Research Issues and Methods symposia presented at the annual meeting of the AGS and sponsored by the AGS Research Committee. In addition, JAGS invites authors to submit original articles that are responsive to the goals of the series.
As the demand for care of older adults continues to increase, so will the demand for evidence to guide that care.16 We hope that this new series on challenges in clinical aging research will contribute to the continued growth of that evidence.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Sponsor's Role: Dr. Studenski received National Institutes of Health support related to this work from Grants P30 AG024827, P20 CA103730, U13 AG028320, and K07 AG023641.
Footnotes
Author Contributions: Dr. Studenski conceived and wrote this editorial.
Conflict of Interest: Dr. Studenski has received funds for investigator-initiated research and for consultation related to the development of outcome measures for clinical research from Merck, Eli Lilly, GlaxoSmithKline, Pfizer, and Asubio.
REFERENCES
- 1.Mody L. Recruitment and retention of older adults in aging research. J AmGeriatr Soc. 2008 doi: 10.1111/j.1532-5415.2008.02015.x. &&:&–&. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 2.Older Americans . Key Indicators of Well-Being. Federal Interagency Forum on Aging Related Statistics; Washington, DC: 2008. 2008. [Google Scholar]
- 3.Weiss CO, Boyd CM, Yu Q, et al. Patterns of prevalent major chronic disease among older adults in the United States. JAMA. 2007;298:1160–1162. doi: 10.1001/jama.298.10.1160-b. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 4.Heiat A, Gross CP, Krumholz HM. Representation of the elderly, women, and minorities in heart failure clinical trials. Arch Intern Med. 2002;162:1682–1688. doi: 10.1001/archinte.162.15.1682. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 5.Hutchins LF, Unger JM, Crowley JJ, et al. Underrepresentation of patients 65 years of age or older in cancer-treatment trials. N Engl J Med. 1999;341:2061–2067. doi: 10.1056/NEJM199912303412706. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 6.Lee PY, Alexander KP, Hammill BG, et al. Representation of elderly persons and women in published randomized trials of acute coronary syndromes. JAMA. 2001;286:708–713. doi: 10.1001/jama.286.6.708. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 7.Mitchell SL, Sullivan EA, Lipsitz LA. Exclusion of elderly subjects from clinical trials for Parkinson disease. Arch Neurol. 1997;54:1393–1398. doi: 10.1001/archneur.1997.00550230060018. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 8.Schneider LS, Olin JT, Lyness SA, et al. Eligibility of Alzheimer's disease clinic patients for clinical trials. J Am Geriatr Soc. 1997;45:923–928. doi: 10.1111/j.1532-5415.1997.tb02960.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 9.Besdine R, Boult C, Brangman S, et al. Caring for older Americans: The future of geriatric medicine. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2005;53:S245–S256. doi: 10.1111/j.1532-5415.2005.53350.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 10.Boyd CM, Darer J, Boult C, et al. Clinical practice guidelines and quality of care for older patients with multiple comorbid diseases: Implications for pay for performance. JAMA. 2005;294:716–724. doi: 10.1001/jama.294.6.716. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 11.Ferrucci L, Windham G, Fried LP. Frailty in older persons. Genus. 2005;LXI:39–53. [Google Scholar]
- 12.Inouye SK, Studenski S, Tinetti ME, et al. Geriatric syndromes: Clinical, research, and policy implications of a core geriatric concept. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2007;55:780–791. doi: 10.1111/j.1532-5415.2007.01156.x. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 13.Espeland MA, Gill TM, Guralnik J, et al. Designing clinical trials of interventions for mobility disability: Results from the lifestyle interventions and independence for elders pilot (LIFE-P) trial. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci. 2007;62:1237–1243. doi: 10.1093/gerona/62.11.1237. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 14.Fried LP, Tangen CM, Walston J, et al. Frailty in older adults: Evidence for a phenotype. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci. 2001;56:M146–M156. doi: 10.1093/gerona/56.3.m146. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 15.Hardy SE, Gill TM. Recovery from disability among community-dwelling older persons. JAMA. 2004;291:1596–1602. doi: 10.1001/jama.291.13.1596. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 16.Retooling for an Aging America: Building the Health Care Workforce. Institute of Medicine; Washington, DC: 2008. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
