Creating age-friendly cities: prioritizing interventions with Q-methodology

Atkins, Mariana

doi:10.1080/13563475.2019.1608164

Cited by 9 publications

(45 citation statements)

References 47 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The full texts of the remaining 380 manuscripts were reviewed based on the inclusion and exclusion criteria. As a result of this process, 11 studies were included in this review [ 60 , 61 , 62 , 63 , 64 , 65 , 66 , 67 , 68 , 69 , 70 ] ( Figure 1 ).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The [69] and work status (9.1%) [66]. In 63.6% of retained publications, participants were aged 60 years and older [62,64,65,[67][68][69][70], with 18.2% of cases involving participants aged 50 and older [60,63] and one study that did not specify the older people's age [61].…”

Section: Sample Characteristicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The remaining studies involved adaptations related to the AFCC aims, including proposed models for friendly and safe housing (risk of falls, healthcare technology in the home) for older people [64,69], and for age-friendly hospitals [66]. Intervention strategies were also implemented focused on a single AFCC domain (45.5%) [62,65,67,69,70], and others addressed several domains at once (housing, transportation, social and health services, civic participation and employment, social participation, and respect and social inclusion) (36.4%) [63,64,66,68] and, to a lesser degree, interventions tackling all of the AFCC domains (18.2%) [60,61]. The AFCC domains receiving most attention were: transportation (54.5%) [ [60].…”

Section: Intervention Characteristicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…To the contrary, other studies referred to positive changes post-intervention, including lower frequency of falls [64]. In addition, positive changes in health post-intervention were reported in 18.2% of studies that did not describe effectiveness in detail [61,63].…”

Section: Effectiveness Of Interventionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…[60][61][62]65,67], respect and social inclusion (45.5%)[60,61,63,66,68], housing (36.4%)[60,61,64,68], community support and health services (36.4%)[60,61,66,69], social participation (36.4%)[60,61,63,68], outdoor spaces and buildings (27.3%)[60,61,70], civic participation and employment (27.3%)[60,61,64], and communication and information(18.2%) …”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Environmental and Psychosocial Interventions in Age-Friendly Communities and Active Ageing: A Systematic Review

Sánchez-González

Rojo-Pérez

Rodríguez-Rodríguez

et al. 2020

IJERPH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: The academic literature contains little information regarding the interventions that create age-friendly cities and communities in order to promote active ageing. Objectives: A systematic review was carried out to determine the available empirical evidence in relation to the characteristics, content and effectiveness of interventions aimed at improving environmental and psychosocial risk factors for older people, from the perspective of age-friendly communities and the promotion of active ageing. Methods: Following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, the studies retained in this review were identified through a systematic search of the academic literature in selected electronic databases including Web of Science and Scopus. Independent critical appraisal and data extraction were conducted by two reviewers. The checklist was used to assess the quality of the articles. Findings: The search identified 1020 potentially eligible documents, of which 11 satisfied the established criteria. Non-exhaustive practices prevailed over rigorous investigations, with a high proportion of studies observed to be of low methodological quality and at high risk of bias. This reflected the predominance of uncontrolled interventions. Environmental interventions were focused on reducing risk and adapting the everyday environmental setting, while psychosocial interventions prioritised social strategies (behavioural changes, promotion of participation) and training. Interventions were more effective in certain domains of age-friendly cities and communities such as transportation and housing, followed by increased participation as a lifestyle-related behavioural change. The inferred changes were associated with providing information and enhancing skills; modifying access, barriers, exposures, and opportunities; enhancing services and support; continuity and effectiveness of changes over time; and modifying policies based on the bottom-up approach of age-friendly cities and communities (AFCC). Discussion and conclusion: Interventions focused on personal and organisational aspects might have positive effects in the longer term. However, fewer changes would be observed in interventions revolving around changing lifestyles owing to the impact of complex multi-causal factors. The relative effectiveness in terms of health calls into question the design of interventions and the supposed “friendliness” of certain communities. There is a need to encourage sound longitudinal research aimed at providing key knowledge for the implementation and evaluation of public policies, and to encourage age-friendly community programmes to promote active ageing.

show abstract