Cited by 8

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

It is Time to Embrace 21st-Century Medicine

Kaeberlein, Matt·2019·Public Policy & Aging Report

Abstract

Biomedical research and clinical practice have traditionally been focused on disease rather than health. We typically wait until people are sick before trying to cure their disease or alleviate their symptoms, rather than actively supporting health and wellbeing in the absence of disease. Current demographic trends toward older populations make this approach problematic. Instead of improving the quality of life, we may be extending the period of morbidity and frailty for millions of people. Twenty-first century medicine should adopt the strategy of directly targeting the molecular mechanisms that cause biological aging. Only in this way will it be possible to slow the onset and progression of multiple age-related diseases simultaneously, in order to extend the healthspan proportionately with the lifespan. The world is getting older. Over the past century, life expectancies in developed countries have increased approximately 60% at the same time that birth rates have declined. The net effect of these trends is that nearly every nation is experiencing a dramatic “graying” of the population. Unfortunately, the increase in life expectancy does not appear to have been matched by increasing “health expectancy” (Nikolich-Žugich et al., 2016). The concept of the healthspan refers to the period of life spent free from chronic, age-related disease or disability (Kaeberlein, 2018), but increases in the human lifespan have not been matched by increases in the population healthspan (Olsha…

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/ppar/prz022

Cites

4 of 4 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Show all 4 references

Research works printed but not linked: 11

  1. Chang, 2019, Measuring population ageing: An analysis of the Global Burden of Disease Study 2017, The Lancet. Public Health,, 4, e159, 10.1016/S2468-2667(19)30019-2 · DOI
  2. Goldman, 2013, Substantial health and economic returns from delayed aging may warrant a new focus for medical research, Health Affairs, 32, 1698, 10.1377/hlthaff.2013.0052 · DOI · Paper page
  3. Kaeberlein, 2017, Translational geroscience: A new paradigm for 21st century medicine, Translational Medicine of Aging, 1, 1, 10.1016/j.tma.2017.09.004 · DOI
  4. Kaeberlein, 2018, How healthy is the healthspan concept?, Geroscience,, 40, 361, 10.1007/s11357-018-0036-9 · DOI · Paper page
  5. Kaeberlein, 2019, Rapamycin and Alzheimer’s disease: Time for a clinical trial?, Science Translational Medicine, 11, eaar4289, 10.1126/scitranslmed.aar4289 · DOI
  6. Lombard, 2016, Biology of aging and longevity., 1
  7. Martin, 2003, Research on aging: The end of the beginning, Science, 299, 1339, 10.1126/science.299.5611.1339 · DOI
  8. National Institute on Aging., 2019, Trans-NIH geroscience interest group (GSIG).
  9. National Institutes of Health., 2019, Appropriations history by institute/center (1938 to present).
  10. Nikolich-Žugich, 2016, Preparing for an aging world: Engaging biogerontologists, geriatricians, and the society, The Journals of Gerontology. Series A, Biological Sciences and Medical Sciences,, 71, 435, 10.1093/gerona/glv164 · DOI
  11. Olshansky, 2018, From lifespan to healthspan, JAMA,, 320, 1323, 10.1001/jama.2018.12621 · DOI · Paper page

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Kaeberlein, M.
Venue
Public Policy & Aging Report
Published
2019
Volume
29
Issue
4
Pages
111-115
ISSN
  • 1055-3037
  • 2053-4892
Cited by
8
References
4
Language
en

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review