CALL FOR ABSTRACTS — 141st APHA Annual Meeting

Theme: Think Global, Act Local: Best Practices Around the World

Aging & Public Health

Submission Deadline: Monday, February 18, 2013


We welcome empirical research or practice-related presentations, using either quantitative or qualitative methods. Abstracts should be no more than 250 words. Individuals may submit up to two abstracts as first author to the Aging and Public Health Section. Submissions may be for poster, oral, or roundtable session formats; please note desired format on the abstract form.  All presenters must become individual members of APHA and register for the Annual Meeting in order to give their presentation. Abstracts cannot be published in any journal prior to the APHA Annual Meeting.

Specific areas of interest for Aging and Public Health include but are not limited to:

  • Aging and the built environment
  • Alzheimer’s disease / dementia
  • Chronic disease management and self-care
  • Climate change and aging
  • Communicating health information with older adults
  • Community-based long-term care
  • Emergency preparedness and older adults
  • End of life care/issues
  • Environment and aging
  • Health promotion for older adults
  • Healthcare outcomes and quality of life
  • Healthcare utilization and costs
  • Healthy communities for healthy aging
  • Immigrant and minority health and aging
  • Innovations in health and aging practice
  • International health and aging and healthcare policy
  • Medicare/Medicaid policy
  • Mental Health Diagnoses’ Contributing to Hospital-acquired Falls: Evidence from 2007 Massachusetts AHA and SID Data
    Objective: Nursing home residents increasingly are being admitted from hospitals, with Black minorities.  We examined factors associated with minority patients’ discharge status and how these vary by age. 

    Methodology: We compared working-age patients (age 18 to 64, n=100,241) and older patients (age 65 and older, n=79,158), using the pooled data from the 2007 through 2009 National Hospital Discharge Survey.  A logistic regression analysis was used to examine the risk factors for institutionalization.

    Findings: General mental disorders diagnosis increased the risks of institutionalization among the total adult population (age 18 and older) and in the older patients (OR=1.65, 95%CI[1.54,1.76]).  Non-organic psychotic conditions increased the risks of institutional use in both groups.  Patients with mental retardations were more likely to be institutionalized in both groups (OR=4.29, 95%CI[3.32,5.54], and OR=1.75, 95%CI[1.07,2.86]). 

    Being Black was associated with higher risks in older group but not in working-age group. Medicare or Medicaid coverage was each associated with greater odds of institutionalization in both groups, and the effect was greater in the working-age group (OR=3.27, 95%CI[2.98,3.59]  and OR=2.42, 95%CI[2.17,2.70]).   Admission through the ER or from nursing facilities substantially increased the odds of institutional use.  Patients discharged with lower-limb fractures or HIV/AIDS experienced greater the odds to be institutionalized in both age groups.     

    Implications: Patients with psychosis disorders or mental retardations experienced significantly greater odds of institutionalization after adjusting for other factors.  Being Black increased the risks, especially among older patients. Research is needed to further explore the basis of this disparity.

  • Nursing home care and utilization
  • Nutrition and aging
  • Older adults and disability
  • Personal assistance, social support, and caregiving
  • Physical activity and successful aging
  • Public health policy and aging
  • Racial/ethnic disparities
  • Rural aging issues
  • Technology and aging
  • Translating aging research into practice
  • Women's health issues
Symposium Sessions                                                             

We also invite submissions for 90-minute symposium sessions. Please e-mail the program chair if you are submitting a symposium; these require special processing for appropriate review. There will only be a few open time slots available for consideration as a session. Because of the volume of abstracts we receive and the limited number of oral sessions we are allotted, we cannot consider symposium sessions containing fewer than four presented papers.  Symposium proposals must be submitted along with each individual paper that make up the symposium. This complete package gives the reviewers more substance from which to judge the overall merits of the proposal. Symposium submissions should contain:    

1. An overall session abstract, which includes a rationale for the session, the proposed paper titles, author(s), order of presentation, and the abstract numbers for the individual papers;

2. Clear labels of the session abstract with “SESSION ABSTRACT - your proposed session title" (you fill in the italicized part but keep the SESSION ABSTRACT) on the electronic submission page form when entering your proposal;

3. The proposed moderator and/or discussant;

4. Be sure that each individual proposed presentation submits a separate abstract under the same topic (e.g. Rural aging issues) and that it indicates that it is part of a symposium referencing the session title, otherwise they may become lost in the shuffle; please include the session abstract #;

5. Contact information (phone and e-mail) for person in charge of session directly on the overall session abstract is provided, so we can contact you easily; and

6. Indicating whether or not you would like to have the individual abstracts considered for presentation in other sessions, if your proposed session is not accepted. Please state, "YES, I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE ABSTRACTS CONSIDERED SEPARATELY" or "NO, I DO NOT WANT TO HAVE THESE ABSTRACTS CONSIDERED SEPARATELY".

Please be aware that each paper in the symposium is scored individually and the symposium is also scored as a group. The individual abstract for each paper must score reasonably well in order to be considered for a symposium session.

Abstract scoring:

All abstract submissions are evaluated based on the following criteria:

1. Significance of the problem to public health and aging.

2. Innovativeness of ideas, methods and or approach.

3. Methodological rigor of methods and approach (analytical design for research, systematic approach for practice and or policy).

4. Presentation of empirical findings.

5. Implications identified for future research, practice and/or policy.

6. Clarity of writing.     

Aging and Public Health Section Awards    

The Aging and Public Health Section sponsors several awards in various categories of aging and public health.  To be considered for one of the following awards, please indicate which one on your abstract submission form by selecting the award from the drop-down box.

* Aetna Susan B. Anthony Award for Excellence in Research on Older Women and Public Health                            

* Aging and Public Health Rural and Environment Award

* Archstone Foundation Award for Excellence in Program Innovation

* Betty J. Cleckley Minority Issues Research Award

* James G. Zimmer New Investigator Research Award

* Laurence G. Branch Doctoral Student Research Award funded by the Retirement Research Foundation

* Master’s Student Research Award funded by the Retirement Research Foundation

* Nobuo Maeda International Aging & Public Health Research Award

* Erickson Foundation Research Award in Positive Aging

We would like to highlight two of the above awards. Through the generous support of the Retirement Research Foundation and its president, Marilyn Henessey, Aging and Public Health Section offers two student research awards.  The Retirement Research Foundation Masters Student Research Award recognizes outstanding research led by a student whole matriculating in a Master’s program.  Individuals who are currently in doctoral programs, or are in other settings but who completed the research as masters student are eligible to submit an abstract for this award.  Similarly, the Retirement Research Foundation Doctoral Student Research Award (also known as the Lawrence G. Branch Doctoral Student Research Award) is awarded to outstanding research led by a student while matriculating in a doctoral program.  The student is eligible even if the doctoral degree has been recently been completed.  For both student awards, Aging and Public Health Section /APHA membership will be provided through the award for attendance at the 2013 Annual Meeting.  Funding is also available to support conference attendance (e.g., registration).                                         

All awardees will be recognized at the Aging and Public Health Awards session, present their research at the Annual Meeting, receive a monetary award, and be recognized on the Website of the Aging and Public Health Section. 

Each abstract can be considered only for one award. You may, however, submit different abstracts to be considered for different awards. For submission for the Archstone Foundation Award, please contact Allan Goldman for further details at allangoldman28@gmail.com. For more information about the individual awards, contact Aging and Public Health Awards Chair Denys Lau, PhD, at denystlau@yahoo.com or view the Web site of the Aging and Public Health Section.

For questions and inquiries, please contact the 2013 Program Planners listed at the bottom of the page.

Continuing Education Credit

APHA values the ability to provide continuing education credit to physicians, nurses, health educators and those certified in public health at its annual meeting. Please complete all required information when submitting an abstract so members can claim credit for attending your session. These credits are necessary for members to keep their licenses and credentials.

For a session to be eligible for Continuing Education Credit, each presenter must provide:

1) an abstract free of trade and/or commercial product names

2) at least one MEASURABLE objective (DO NOT USE understand or to learn as objectives, they are not measureable).

Examples of Acceptable Measurable Action Words:
Explain, Demonstrate, Analyze, Formulate, Discuss, Compare, Differentiate, Describe, Name, Assess, Evaluate, Identify, Design, Define or List.

3) A signed Conflict of Interest (Disclosure) form with a relevant Qualification Statement. See an example of an acceptable Qualification Statement on the online Disclosure form.

Thank you for your assistance in making your session of value to the audience and worthy of credit. Contact Annette Ferebee at annette.ferebee@apha.org if you have any questions concerning continuing education credit. Please contact the program planner for all other questions.
Ready?
Program Planner Contact Information:
Yu Kang, PhD
School of Health and Human Services, College of Public Affairs
University of Baltimore
Liberal Arts and Policy Building
10 W. Preston St.
Baltimore, MD 21201
Phone: 410 837 6096
ykang@ubalt.edu

and
Hongdao Meng, MPH, PhD
College of Behavioral & Community Sciences, School of Aging Studies
University of South Florida
13301 Bruce B Downs Blvd
MHC 1300
Tampa, FL 33612
Phone: (813) 974-5504
Fax: (813) 974-9754
meng@usf.edu