We thank Dhruva Nandi and colleagues for their interest in our Article.1 They highlighted several considerations for improving policy attention to address elder abuse, which were valuable suggestions. However, we believe that they have misinterpreted some of our Article.
The purpose of our analysis was to identify the factors accounting for the low global political priority of addressing elder abuse, rather than to document risk factors for elder abuse incidence, as they suggest. The literature on risk factors is relatively robust,2 whereas little is known about the factors that account for low political priority of elder abuse, hence our focus. Further, because of our aim, we used two sources of data: interviews of people advocating for increased attention of elder abuse, who are at the forefront of shaping global discussions in this area, and a systematic review of the relevant literature in multiple languages.
Nonetheless, we agree with three important considerations for advancing policy attention to elder abuse that were suggested by Nandi and colleagues. Firstly, although our study was at the global level, analyses of political prioritisation of elder abuse at the national level should be done—especially in low and middle-income countries, where forms of elder abuse might be different, prevalence rates could be higher,3 and distinct national and local governance structures and dynamics differentially affect the amount of attention given to this issue. Secondly, distinct sociocultural norms relevant to elder abuse require further examination; these not only affect the determinants of elder abuse, but also the perception of the problem and policy solutions to policy makers. Finally, improving the measurement and detection of elder abuse and data on its prevalence is critical because of their key role in increasing the problem's visibility and convincing policy makers to act. Nandi and colleagues highlight some potentially innovative methods to help with mitigating elder abuse, including the use of artificial intelligence.
We declare no competing interests.
References
- 1.Mikton C, Campo-Tena L, Yon Y, Beaulieu M, Shawar YR. Factors shaping the global political priority of addressing elder abuse: a qualitative policy analysis. Lancet Healthy Longev. 2022;3:e531–e539. doi: 10.1016/S2666-7568(22)00143-X. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 2.Storey JE. Risk factors for elder abuse and neglect: a review of the literature. Aggress Violent Behav. 2020;50:101339. [Google Scholar]
- 3.Yon Y, Mikton CR, Gassoumis ZD, Wilber KH. Elder abuse prevalence in community settings: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet Glob Health. 2017;5:e147–e156. doi: 10.1016/S2214-109X(17)30006-2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
