Social inclusion programming for older adults living in age-friendly cities: a scoping review.

IF 2.3 3区 医学 Q1 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL BMJ Open Pub Date : 2025-01-28 DOI:10.1136/bmjopen-2024-088439
Madalena Pamela Liougas, Adriana Fortino, Kari Brozowski, Josephine McMurray
{"title":"Social inclusion programming for older adults living in age-friendly cities: a scoping review.","authors":"Madalena Pamela Liougas, Adriana Fortino, Kari Brozowski, Josephine McMurray","doi":"10.1136/bmjopen-2024-088439","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Creating age-friendly cities (AFCs) is essential for supporting older adults' well-being. The WHO's 2007 guide outlines key features of AFCs, including social inclusion. Despite increasing numbers of AFC programmes, diverse experiences of ageing are often overlooked. This scoping review explores innovative programmes implemented by AFCs to enhance social inclusion for older adults.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>A scoping review following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews guidelines.</p><p><strong>Data sources: </strong>Systematic searches were conducted between December 2023 and January 2024 across relevant databases (Ovid Medline, OVID Embase, OVID PsycINFO, CINAHL, Web of Science, Cochrane Library and Scopus) and the grey literature.</p><p><strong>Eligibility criteria for selecting studies: </strong>Selection criteria included English language publications describing evaluated age-friendly, social inclusion programmes for older adults.</p><p><strong>Data extraction and synthesis: </strong>Data extraction followed Gonyea and Hudson's (2015) framework assessing programmes on population, environment and/or sector inclusion levels. Inductive analysis identified and evaluated aspects of social inclusion.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We identified 20 peer-reviewed publications and 18 grey literature sources. Most programmes (peer review, n=19, 95.0%; grey, n=18, 100.0%) addressed population inclusion, incorporated environment (peer review, n=10, 50.0%; grey, n=15, 83.3%) and/or sector inclusion (peer review, n=7, 35.0%; grey, n=15, 83.3%). Key outcomes included an improved sense of belonging, increased engagement with community resources and activities, enhanced digital literacy and connectivity, and a reduction in feelings of loneliness and isolation. A notable gap was the absence of studies focused on Indigenous populations.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>We highlight that programmes addressing population, environment and sectoral inclusion may improve the well-being of older adults in urban settings. Our findings will inform AFC practices and policies by deepening our understanding of how social inclusion can be improved for older adults, including those from under-represented groups, ensuring an equitable approach to enhancing quality of life.</p>","PeriodicalId":9158,"journal":{"name":"BMJ Open","volume":"15 1","pages":"e088439"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11781138/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMJ Open","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2024-088439","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: Creating age-friendly cities (AFCs) is essential for supporting older adults' well-being. The WHO's 2007 guide outlines key features of AFCs, including social inclusion. Despite increasing numbers of AFC programmes, diverse experiences of ageing are often overlooked. This scoping review explores innovative programmes implemented by AFCs to enhance social inclusion for older adults.

Design: A scoping review following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews guidelines.

Data sources: Systematic searches were conducted between December 2023 and January 2024 across relevant databases (Ovid Medline, OVID Embase, OVID PsycINFO, CINAHL, Web of Science, Cochrane Library and Scopus) and the grey literature.

Eligibility criteria for selecting studies: Selection criteria included English language publications describing evaluated age-friendly, social inclusion programmes for older adults.

Data extraction and synthesis: Data extraction followed Gonyea and Hudson's (2015) framework assessing programmes on population, environment and/or sector inclusion levels. Inductive analysis identified and evaluated aspects of social inclusion.

Results: We identified 20 peer-reviewed publications and 18 grey literature sources. Most programmes (peer review, n=19, 95.0%; grey, n=18, 100.0%) addressed population inclusion, incorporated environment (peer review, n=10, 50.0%; grey, n=15, 83.3%) and/or sector inclusion (peer review, n=7, 35.0%; grey, n=15, 83.3%). Key outcomes included an improved sense of belonging, increased engagement with community resources and activities, enhanced digital literacy and connectivity, and a reduction in feelings of loneliness and isolation. A notable gap was the absence of studies focused on Indigenous populations.

Conclusion: We highlight that programmes addressing population, environment and sectoral inclusion may improve the well-being of older adults in urban settings. Our findings will inform AFC practices and policies by deepening our understanding of how social inclusion can be improved for older adults, including those from under-represented groups, ensuring an equitable approach to enhancing quality of life.

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
生活在老年人友好城市的老年人社会包容规划:范围审查。
目标:创建老年人友好型城市(AFCs)对于支持老年人的福祉至关重要。世卫组织2007年指南概述了AFCs的主要特征,包括社会包容。尽管AFC项目越来越多,但老龄问题的不同经历往往被忽视。这项范围审查探讨了afc实施的创新方案,以加强老年人的社会包容。设计:根据系统评价的首选报告项目和扩展范围评价指南的荟萃分析进行范围评价。数据来源:系统检索了2023年12月至2024年1月期间的相关数据库(Ovid Medline、Ovid Embase、Ovid PsycINFO、CINAHL、Web of Science、Cochrane Library和Scopus)和灰色文献。选择研究的资格标准:选择标准包括描述评估的老年人友好型社会包容项目的英语出版物。数据提取和综合:数据提取遵循Gonyea和Hudson(2015)的框架,评估人口、环境和/或部门包容水平的方案。归纳分析识别和评估社会包容的各个方面。结果:我们确定了20篇同行评议的出版物和18篇灰色文献来源。大多数项目(同行评议,n=19, 95.0%;灰色,n=18, 100.0%)解决了人口纳入,合并环境(同行评议,n=10, 50.0%;灰色,n=15, 83.3%)和/或行业纳入(同行评议,n=7, 35.0%;灰色,n=15, 83.3%)。主要成果包括增强归属感,增加对社区资源和活动的参与,增强数字素养和连通性,减少孤独感和孤立感。一个显著的差距是缺乏针对土著人口的研究。结论:我们强调,解决人口、环境和部门包容性的方案可能会改善城市环境中老年人的福祉。我们的研究结果将通过加深我们对如何改善老年人(包括来自代表性不足群体的老年人)的社会包容的理解,为AFC的实践和政策提供信息,确保以公平的方式提高生活质量。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
BMJ Open
BMJ Open MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL-
CiteScore
4.40
自引率
3.40%
发文量
4510
审稿时长
2-3 weeks
期刊介绍: BMJ Open is an online, open access journal, dedicated to publishing medical research from all disciplines and therapeutic areas. The journal publishes all research study types, from study protocols to phase I trials to meta-analyses, including small or specialist studies. Publishing procedures are built around fully open peer review and continuous publication, publishing research online as soon as the article is ready.
期刊最新文献
Effect of antenatal care attendance on maternal and birth outcomes in Somaliland: a cohort study. Distribution disparities among medical specialists in Thailand: an equity analysis of the national health workforce database (2015-2024). Open-label randomised controlled trial of aripiprazole/sertraline combination in comparison with quetiapine for the clinical and cost-effectiveness of treatment of bipolar depression (the ASCEnD study): study protocol. Do sociodemographic variables influence sexual dysfunction in young people with type 1 diabetes? A quantitative study in Poland. Excitatory amino acid inhibitors in adults with acute moderate to severe traumatic brain injury: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1