Cited by 10Geriatric Care and Nursing HomesAging, Elder Care, and Social IssuesDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 9 of the 9 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Prevalence and Correlates of Gray Market Use for Aging and Dementia Long-Term Care in the U.S

Shih, Regina A., Friedman, Esther M., Chen, Emily K., Whiting, Grace C.·2022·Journal of Applied Gerontology

Abstract

Objectives: To estimate the national prevalence and sociodemographic correlates of gray market utilization, consisting of paid providers who are unrelated to the recipient, not working for a regulated agency, and potentially unscreened and untrained, for aging and dementia-related long-term care. Methods: We surveyed a nationally representative sample of 1,037 American Life Panel respondents aged 18 years and older. Results: Nearly a third of Americans who arranged paid care sought gray market care for persons with dementia, and most (65%) combined it with unpaid care. Respondents who arranged gray market care had 66% lower odds of currently working, and those living in rural areas had an almost 5-times higher odds of arranging dementia gray market care. Discussion: Gray market care represents a substantial proportion of paid, long-term care for older adults and may fill gaps in access to care.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/07334648211023681

Cites

9 of 9 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

Flagged first, then by citations

Show all 9 references

Research works printed but not linked: 4

  1. Ngyuen V., 2017, Long-term support and services—AARP facts sheet
  2. Redfoot D., 2013, Insight on the Issues, 85, 1
  3. Shih R. A., 2014, Rand Health Quarterly, 4
  4. U.S Department of Labor, 2011, Preliminary regulatory impact analysis of the proposed revisions to the companionship regulations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 10

Metadata

Authors
Shih, R. A., Friedman, E. M., Chen, E. K., & Whiting, G. C.
Affiliations
  • RAND Corporation (US)
  • National Alliance for Caregiving, Washington, DC, USA
Corresponding author
Shih, Regina A.
Venue
Journal of Applied Gerontology
Published
2021-06-11
Volume
41
Issue
4
Pages
1030-1034
ISSN
  • 0733-4648 (ISSN-L)
  • 1552-4523
OpenAlex
W3171686445
Cited by
10
References
9
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 1
FWCI
0.56
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Applied Gerontology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
National Institute on Minority Health and Health Disparities (R01MD010360)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Geriatrics and Gerontology › Geriatric Care and Nursing Homes
  • Social Sciences › Life-span and Life-course Studies › Aging, Elder Care, and Social Issues
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Dementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Keywords
dementia care, long-term care, paid care, unpaid care work, older adults, rural residence, employment status, health care access, prevalence, sociodemographic correlates
MeSH terms
Aged, Aging, Dementia, Humans, Long-Term Care, Surveys and Questionnaires, United States, Prevalence

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