4.4 Review

Understanding dementia in the sociocultural context: A review

期刊

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SOCIAL PSYCHIATRY
卷 61, 期 2, 页码 198-204

出版社

SAGE PUBLICATIONS LTD
DOI: 10.1177/0020764014560357

关键词

Anthropology; culture; ethnic elderly; dementia

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: The perception of old age differs in different societies and cultures: in the Western societies, the loss of youth, multiple losses of functions and independence resulting in inability produce a social stigma. Dementia is common among the elderly, regardless of their ethnic background. In countries dominated by Western philosophical thought, the cognitive domain has been privileged over other mental domains. Knowledge of cultural factors is essential to an understanding of aging and dementia; studies are currently dominated by biomedical models that consider dementing disorders solely as a pathological entity caused by neuronal and neurotrasmitters loss, and focus on the individual without regard to sociocultural context. Aim: The purpose of this study is to explore how the phenomenon of dementia is perceived in ethnically diverse groups and cultures. Methods: Medline and Google Scholar searches were conducted for relevant articles, chapters and books published before 2014. Search terms used included anthropology, culture, ethnic elderly and dementia. Publications found through this indexed search were reviewed for further relevant references. Results: The experience of dementia is not universal, but is profoundly shaped by culture in which the demented person lives. Sociocultural conceptualization of the symptoms of dementing diseases remains obscure in many countries. Conclusion: Sociocultural conceptualization of Alzheimer's disease and other dementias is of growing interest in shaping the interpretation of the symptoms of dementing diseases. To explore the intersection of culture with the expression of dementia may optimize the management of these complex and chronic conditions.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据