Non‐familial intergenerational interventions and their impact on social and mental wellbeing of both younger and older people—A mapping review and evidence and gap map

Abstract

Background Opportunities for social connection between generations in the UK have diminished over the last few decades because of changes in the way that we live and work. The decline in communal spaces such as libraries, youth clubs and community centres mean that there are fewer opportunities to meet and mix socially with other generations outside our own families. Increased working hours, improved technology, changes in family patterns, relationship breakdowns within families and migration are also believed to be contributory factors to generation segregation. There are many potential economic, social and political impacts of generations living separate and parallel lives, for example, higher health and social care costs, an undermining of trust between generations reduced social capital, a reliance on the media to form understanding of others’ viewpoints and higher levels of anxiety and loneliness. Intergenerational programmes and activities can take many forms and are delivered in many settings. Evidence suggests that intergenerational activity can have a positive impact on participants, for example, in reducing loneliness and exclusion for both older people and children and young people, improving mental health, increasing mutual understanding and addressing important issues such as ageism, housing and care. There are currently no other EGMs that exist that address this type of intervention; however, it would complement existing EGMs addressing child welfare. Objectives To identify, appraise and bring together the evidence on the use of intergenerational practice, to answer the following specific research questions: What is the volume, nature and diversity of research on, and evaluation of, intergenerational practice and learning? What approaches have been used to deliver intergenerational activities and programmes that may be relevant to providing such services during and in the subsequent recovery from the COVID‐19 pandemic? What promising intergenerational activities and programmes have been developed and are being used but have not yet been subject to formal evaluation? Search Methods We searched MEDLINE (via OvidSp), EMBASE (via OvidSp), PsycINFO (via OvidSp), CINAHL (via EBSCOHost), Social Policy and Practice (via OvidSp), Health Management Information Consortium (via OvidSp), Ageline (via EBSCOhost), ASSIA (via ProQuest), Social Science Citations Index (via Web of Science), ERIC (via EBSCOhost), Community Care Inform Children, Research in Practice for Children, ChildData (via Social Policy and Practice), the Campbell Library, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews and the CENTRAL database between 22 and 30 July 2021. We searched for additional grey literature via the Conference Proceedings Citation Index (via Web of Science) and ProQuest Dissertation & Theses Global and via relevant organisation websites, for example, Age UK, Age International, the Centre for Ageing Better, Barnado's, Children's Commission, UNICEF, Generations Working Together, the Intergenerational Foundation, Linki...

PROTOCOL: What is the effect of intergenerational activities on the wellbeing and mental health of older people?

“…Searches were conducted to populate the evidence gap map (Campbell, 2023 ) from which this review originates. We have set up automated search alerts in the databases listed below to identify additional relevant literature which we will use to update the map as the project progresses; any studies identified by this process will be screened for eligibility in both the map and the review.…”

“…Studies will be identified from the relevant domains of our evidence and gap map and screened against the eligibility criteria independently by two reviewers. Methods for study selection used to populate the evidence and gap map can be found in the report (Campbell, 2023 ). We will also conduct citation searching (forwards and backwards) on the included studies.…”

“…Between July and December 2021, we produced an evidence gap map (Campbell, 2023 ) to illustrate the amount and variety of research on intergenerational interventions and the gaps in research that still exist in this area. We have discussed the evidence from this map with our stakeholders and co‐developed the research question for this review as an important question with both current and future relevance for ageing communities.…”

“…We have developed a logic model (Figure 1 ) to illustrate our understanding of how intergenerational activities might work to improve the mental health and wellbeing of older people. The logic model is based on discussions with the stakeholder group during the construction of the evidence gap map (Campbell, 2023 ) and previously published literature (Ronzi, 2018 ; Vieira, 2016 ).…”

Analysis of the chain mediation effect between intergenerational support and mental health of older adults in urban China: a structural equation model

“…Furthermore, we posit a serial mediating effect, wherein older adults’ attitudes toward younger people in a non-familial context facilitate a transition to their willingness to interact with these younger people, thereby influencing the relationship between intergenerational support and mental health. Factors such as the rapid development of technology, changes in family structure, relationship breakdowns within families, and migration are believed to be catalysts for generational segregation [ 32 ].…”