Skip to main content

Table 3 Quantitative and mixed studies of active Aging

From: Comprehensive 5P framework for active aging using the ecological approach: an iterative systematic review

NO NAME TYPE OF STUDY POPULATION COUNTRY DIMENTION OF ACTIVE AGING
1. [1] Integrative review (This method includes both qualitative and quantitative studies) First, 2543 articles
Then 76 articles were eligible
Iran Social well-being, psychological wellbeing, physical health, spirituality and transcendence, and environment and economic security.
2. [9] Survey study Shapefile sources include the United States Census Bureau USA Walkability, built environment, physical activity, older adults, objective measures, subjective measures, active aging, GIS, neighborhood, urban health
3. [33] multi-method approach (a systematic review and meta-analysis) 100 articles from peer-reviewed and grey literature older adults (≥65 years old) Australia Walkability, residential density/urbanization, street connectivity, access to/availability of destinations and services, infrastructure and streetscape, and safety
4. [23] Cohort and Followed up study 883 participants aged 55 years and older USA Traffic, noise, crime, trash and litter, lighting, and public transportation
5. [36] prevalence-based method 17 years of data at age 65 with and without disabilities Mexico Disabilities
6. [37] Longitudinal study 400 elderly At 60 years of age Mexico High blood pressure, type2 diabetes mellitus, cancer, arthritis, osteoporosis, depression, and dementia
7. [38] Quantitative approach 235 elderly ranged between 60 and 94 years old Brazil Life satisfaction, leisure activities, cigarette smoking, alcohol consumption, practicing of exercises, frequency, activity length, about diet
8. [39] Quantitative approach totalsampleof48adults aged 55 years and over, comprising 4 subsamples of equal numbers (n = 12) Australia Self-ratings of being active
9. [40] Pre- and post-series survey older adults older than 65 years (n = 23) USA Longevity, independence, fitness, and engagement
10. [41] Scoping study and macro-level analyses age 60 or 65 Canada Participation, shopping and obtaining services, active sports, socializing and social participation, car users and non-car-users
11. [42] Comparative study 799 community-dwelling older adults between 65 and 74 years old Canada Health, participation, and security
12. [43] Systematic review and meta-analysis aged≥65 years Older adults, Active travel, Cycling, Walking, Neighbourhood, Built environment
13. [45] Longitudinal Study aged 50 years and above 307 communities China Economic, institutional, and sociodemographic environments paid work, domestic care, participation in community and leisure activities
14. [46] Structural Equation Models (SEM) 402 older persons (≥55 years of age) Singapore high-density urban neighborhood, well connected street, diversity of land use mix, close proximity to amenities and facilities, and aesthetic environment
15. [47] Multiwave study Over 10 years. In-person interviews were conducted with a stratified random sample of 4162 community dwelling adults aged 65 years and older residing in 5 contiguous counties USA Intra-individual (e.g., psychosocial attributes, coping styles, activity accommodations) and extra-individual (e.g., rehabilitation, external supports, and the built, physical, and social environment)
16. [48] Cross-sectional studies Older women (mean age = 69.6; n = 136) and women diagnosed with MS (mean age = 46.1; n = 173) USA Self-efficacy, functional limitations and street connectivity
17. [49] Followed up study age 65–79 years
5218 older
Western Australia Depression, depressive disorder, mood disorder, mental health, risk factors social context
18. [52] Cohort study 1000 participants aged 75, 80 or 85 years Finland Wellbeing, disability, environmental and social support, mobility, health behavior and health literacy
19. [61] Survey ages 65–95 (45 female and 55 male) Turkey Liveable urban environments, Accessible urban environments, social benefits and opportunities, such as health, social life, environment, well-designed, easy recognizable
20. [62] Quantitative approach questionnaire survey 385 older adults aged 60 to 75 Malaysia Permeability, accessibility, and facilitators to walking
21. [63] Cross-sectional interview survey data 4183 older adults (≥60 years) Thailand Walkable neighborhood, neighborhood aesthetics, neighborhood service accessibility, neighborhood criminal safety, neighborhood social trust, neighborhood social support, and neighborhood social cohesion. The present study confirms the important role of age-friendly neighborhoods in terms of physical and social environments
22. [58] Mixed method approach 117 participants aged 55+ years China urban spaces and infrastructure on mobility and well-being
23. [64] Mixed-use(research method consists of four phases called as conceptual analysis, data collection about the research area and topic, evaluation of results and discussion) 68 users over 65 years Turkey Roads, pollution, safety,insufficiency of maintenance and management, traffic and sociocultural problems
24. [71] Cohort study 435 participants aged 65+ years old USA High mobility barriers and low transportation facilitators
25. [74] Cross-sectional 356 participants 6 to 89 years old Germany Intellectual Abilities, Processing Speed, and Processing Robustness
26. [75] Population based study (N = 60) aged 55 and over USA land use planning and transportation
27. [76] Evidence- based Australia Urban form, parks, walking
28. [77] Multilevel regression 546 community-dwelling older adults USA Education, Annual household income, Gender, Walking self-efficacy
29. [80] Mixed study 97 neighborhood USA Quality of life Aging population Spatial demography Heritage city space perception Neighborhood Social networks
30. [81] Statistical methodology 1188 older adults USA Accessible features (e.g., continuous barrier-free sidewalks and proximity of public transportation)
31. [78] multilevel logistic growth curve models older adults (age 75 +) USA Mobility Disability
32. [82] Multilevel linear regression analyses 20 selected neighborhoods age (65–74 vs. Z75 years) participants (1750 in total) Belgium Walkability and health outcomes
33. [83] Survey study 65 years and older 27 Swedish informants interviewed Sweden Architecture, Place making, Residential homes
34. [85] Data analysis 364 Independently (55–80 years) Netherland Walking, Physical environment, Pedestrians, Active transport
35. [88] Statistical Analysis 4000 people aged 65 years and over Hong Kong Physical and mental components of health, frailty, and mortality. Socioeconomic position, lifestyle factors
36. [89] Cross sectional, multilevel design 577 residents (mean age = 74 years) 56 city USA Density of places of employment, household density, green and open spaces for recreation, number of street intersections
37. [90] Choice-based conjoint analysis Participants (n = 1197) Belgium Recreation Public open spaces Park design naturalness, upkeep, walking paths, outdoor fitness equipment/playground, sport field, benches, drinking fountain, peers, mother with children and homeless person
38. [92] Survey (questionnaire) 103 participants, ranging in age from 72 to 86 years old France Neighborhood satisfaction Well-being
39. [94] Cohort study 3144 people born in 1903, 1908, 1913, or 1918 Japan Age, sex, marital status, baseline functional status, and socioeconomic status, Greenery filled public areas
40. [95] A Population-Based Survey 2619 interviews 65 years and over South Australia Falls (including slips, trips and falls to the ground)
41. [96] Survey (multivariable logistic regression) 4494 elderly Singaporeans (X60 years) Singapore Age, gender, ethnicity, education, housing type, living arrangement and social participation) and health (body mass, diabetes and cognitive status)
42. [97] Quantitative approach 38,595 elderly persons
(≥ 60 years old)
India Age, tobacco smoking, education, living standard, and other such factors
43. [99] Quantitative approach 400 participants Years old+ 60 Iran Happiness, age, sex, satisfaction, peace, level of activity, self-respect
44. [98] quasi-experimental study Seventy-six older adults aged 60 years and over part Mexico Vital Aging, active aging, intervention program, successful aging
45. [100] Quantitative approach European countries labor-market, suicide mortality
46. [110] Multivariate logistic regression 1485 participants + 90 years USA Dementia, chronic diseases or hospitalizations
47. [112] Descriptive-analytic study 379 older adults and 57 managers minimum 60 and maximum 89 years Iran Participation and Collaboration of organizations
48. [113] A mixed-method sequential explanatory design all Canadian communities, defined by the municipalities (N = 3555) Canada 1) Describe and compare age-friendly key components of communities across Canada 2) Identify key components best associated with positive health, social participation and health equity of aging adults 3) Explore how these key components foster positive health, social participation and health equity
\