Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 161

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Prevalence and Risk Factors of Suspected Elder Abuse Subtypes in People Aged 75 and Older

Garre‐Olmo, Josep, Planas‐Pujol, Xènia, López‐Pousa, Secundino, Juvinyà, Dolors, Vilà, Antoni, Vilalta‐Franch, Joan, on behalf of the Frailty and Dependence in Girona Study Group·2009·Journal of the American Geriatrics Society

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To assess the prevalence of suspected elder abuse subtypes and to identify related factors. DESIGN: Cross‐sectional, population‐based, descriptive study. SETTING: Eight rural villages in Girona, Spain. PARTICIPANTS: Six hundred seventy‐six inhabitants aged 75 and older. MEASUREMENTS: All participants were interviewed in their homes using the study protocol, which includes an abuse screen used in previous elder abuse studies and questions about demographic, social, physical, psychiatric, cognitive, and social services variables. RESULTS: The mean age of the participants was 81.7 ± 4.8; 58.2% were female. Prevalence of suspected neglect abuse was 16.0% (95% confidence interval (CI)=13.2–18.9), prevalence of psychosocial abuse was 15.2% (95% CI=12.8–18.2), prevalence of financial abuse was 4.7% (95% CI=3.0–6.4) and prevalence of physical abuse was 0.1% (95% CI=0.004–0.8). Psychosocial abuse was positively associated with depressive symptoms (odds ratio (OR)=1.65, 95% CI=1.01–2.72), social isolation (OR=0.35, 95% CI=0.18–0.69), and frequent bladder incontinence (OR=2.44, 95% CI=1.23–4.86). Neglect abuse was positively associated with social isolation (OR=0.52, 95% CI=0.27–0.99), use of social services (OR=1.83, 95% CI=1.05–3.20), and living arrangements (OR=5.29, 95% CI=2.65–10.56). Financial abuse was associated with marital status (OR=0.15, 95% CI=0.04–0.59), age 85 and older, (OR=3.84, 95% CI=1.70–8.68), and Mini‐Mental State Examination score (OR=0.85, 95% CI=0.78–0.94). CONCLUSION: After adjustment for confounding factors, each subtype of suspected elder abuse was associated with different variables. The results of this study suggest that elder abuse cannot be analyzed as a unitary concept and that risk factors must be assessed for each abuse subtype.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1532-5415.2009.02221.x

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 1 references

Cited by

See all 161

Metadata

Authors
Garre‐Olmo, J., Planas‐Pujol, X., López‐Pousa, S., Juvinyà, D., Vilà, A., Vilalta‐Franch, J., & on behalf of the Frailty and Dependence in Girona Study Group
Venue
Journal of the American Geriatrics Society
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2009-04-28
Volume
57
Issue
5
Pages
815-822
ISSN
  • 0002-8614 (ISSN-L)
  • 1532-5415
OpenAlex
W1575833234
Cited by
161
References
1
FWCI
25.18
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Prevalence and Risk Factors of Suspected Elder Abuse Subtypes in People Aged 75 and Older. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1532-5415.2009.02221.x
The paper
Garre‐Olmo, J., Planas‐Pujol, X., López‐Pousa, S., Juvinyà, D., Vilà, A., Vilalta‐Franch, J., & on behalf of the Frailty and Dependence in Girona Study Group. (2009). Prevalence and Risk Factors of Suspected Elder Abuse Subtypes in People Aged 75 and Older. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1532-5415.2009.02221.x

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.