Key result
Abstracts on diabetes in older adults lack explicit definitions and only ~37% report age criteria.
Why the study?
Although diabetes in older adults is widely used, age criteria, terminology, and clinical characterization vary across studies.
Systematic Review (n=85)
Abstracts describing diabetes in older adults show marked heterogeneity in age criteria, terminology, and clinical characterization, highlighting the need for clearer conceptualization.
Inconsistent age criteria and absent diabetes definitions in abstracts limit applicability to older adults; leaves open standardization of reporting in geriatric research.
Introduction and Objective: “Diabetes in older adults” is widely used, yet age criteria, terminology, and clinical characterization vary across studies. This study mapped how published abstracts describe diabetes in older adults, focusing on age criteria, terminology, and geriatric clinical features. Methods: Records were screened based on titles and abstracts using predefined criteria. Abstracts were included if they contained older-adult-specific information on diabetes and excluded if not about diabetes, not about older adults, or lacking older-adult-specific information. For included abstracts, age criteria, explicit definitional statements, and clinical characteristics were coded as present/absent. Terminology and selected geriatric features were quantified using structured keyword searches of titles and abstracts. Results: A total of 393 abstracts were screened; 85 met inclusion criteria (21.6%). Exclusions were due to not being about diabetes (270), lacking older-adult-specific information (20), or not being about older adults (18). Among included abstracts, age criteria were reported in 31/85 (36.5%) and clinical characteristics in 48/85 (56.5%); explicit definitional statements were not identified (0/85). Terminology was heterogeneous (“elderly” 45/85 [52.9%], “older adult(s)” 28/85 [32.9%], “geriatric” 11/85 [12.9%]). Among abstracts reporting age criteria, age cutoffs or ranges most commonly referenced 65 years (14 reports). Geriatric features were inconsistently represented, including cognitive/dementia-related terms (16/85; 18.8%) and frailty/sarcopenia-related terms (16/85; 18.8%). Conclusion: Abstracts describing diabetes in older adults show marked heterogeneity in age criteria, terminology, and clinical characterization, and seldom state explicit definitions in the abstract. Clearer, age-responsive conceptualization may improve comparability across studies and inform care for older adults with diabetes. Disclosure T. Omura: None. Funding Japan Society for the Promotion of Science (JSPS), KAKENHI JP23K16812, National Center for Geriatrics and Gerontology, Research Funding for Longevity Science (24-1)
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
TAKUYA OMURA (2026) conducted a systematic review in Diabetes in older adults (n=85). Definitions and terminology of diabetes in older adults was evaluated on Reporting of age criteria, explicit definitional statements, and clinical characteristics. Among 85 abstracts describing diabetes in older adults, age criteria were reported in 36.5%, clinical characteristics in 56.5%, and explicit definitional statements were absent (0%).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: