Healthy ageing trials used competing definitions of success
Reviewers found substantial variation in what trials called healthy ageing, complicating comparisons across interventions and research topics.
Based on the published abstract. The full paper may contain additional methods, results and limitations.
The 30-second takeaway
The review found no common definition of healthy ageing across the included trials. Some definitions covered several dimensions of health, while others centred on a particular disease or condition. This means a favourable result under the label 'healthy ageing' can refer to different measured outcomes, making studies harder to compare or combine.
The abstract describes a Medline search focused on the term 'healthy aging.' It does not establish how representative the included definitions are of all ageing research.
Different meanings of the same label
The researchers grouped definitions by whether they covered multiple dimensions using qualitative assessments, multiple dimensions using quantitative assessments, or a specific condition. Definitions focused on a condition formed the largest category.
Why measurement matters
The trials also varied in the physical, cognitive, psychological and social domains they assessed and in the tools they used. The review mapped this variation; it did not determine which interventions improve longevity or overall health.
The original publication
Clarifying healthy aging: building a common language for policy innovation within the Age-It Research Program.
Catalano A, Gilcrease GW, Macciotta A et al.
J Gerontol B Psychol Sci Soc Sci · 2025
- PubMed ID
- 41442759
- Record checked
AI-assisted research and writing. This explains one selected publication; it is not a complete review of everything known. Our approach.
One more question, understood.
Keep track of the research you’ve explored.