Top

BMC Public Health

Published in:

Open Access 01-12-2021 | Technical advance

An ecological approach to the development of an active aging measurement in urban areas (AAMU)

Authors: Azadeh Lak, Parichehr Rashidghalam, S. Nouroddin Amiri, Phyo K. Myint, Hamid R. Baradaran

Published in: BMC Public Health | Issue 1/2021

Abstract

Background

An essential element in the process of “aging well” is the concept of Active Aging (AA). To propose an operational definition of Active Aging, the present study seeks to develop a new measurement tool through an ecological approach. The aim is to recognize significant indicators that play a role in assessing AA in urban areas.

Methods

This study was conducted through a two-phase process of consensus-building: 1) identifying a set of indicators that were likely candidates for inclusion based on literature review, and 2) a two-round modified Delphi survey using an international panel of academic experts in environmental sciences and gerontology to achieve consensus on the importance of the extracted indicators and validate the items. The panelists were asked to complete a researcher-developed questionnaire with an 11-point Likert scale based on the indicators derived in phase 1. Finally, the Delphi survey’s valid indicators and criteria were utilized to develop the measurement tool.

Results

At the outset, a list of 111 indicators of AA was prepared through the desk study. A panel of 22 experts reviewed the extracted items and arrived at a consensus on 99 items in the first round and finalised in the second round. Thematic analysis of the panelists’ open-ended responses revealed new concepts that would be explicitly considered by the consensus group. This developed measurement scale consists of five domains, i.e., individual, spatial, socio-economic, governance, and health-related, which contain 15 criteria and 99 indicators.

Conclusions

The present researchers have developed the active aging measure for urban settlements (AAMU), which can be used both by policy-makers and as an informal self-reported statement among the elderly. AAM’s results in the elderly’s residential environmental communities can improve policy-making to address urban design to sustain an active, healthy life among older people in urban environments.

Available only for authorised users

Rodrigues R, Hofmarcher MM, Leichsenring K, Winkelmann J. Active and healthy ageing for better long-term care: a fresh look at innovative practice examples. Vienna: AUT Eur Comm; 2013.

Ko P-C, Jean Yeung W-J. An ecological framework for active aging in China. J Aging Health. 2018;30:1642–76. https://doi.org/10.1177/0898264318795564.CrossRefPubMed

WHO. Active ageing: A policy framework. 2002.

Lemon BW, Bengtson VL, Peterson JA. An exploration of the activity theory of aging: activity types and life satisfaction among in-movers to a retirement community. J Gerontol. 1972;27:511–23.CrossRef

Lim EZK, Thompson CL. Measuring active ageing among older adults in Singapore. Ageing Soc. 2016;36:1853–69. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0144686X15001312.CrossRef

Davey J, Glasgow K. Positive ageing: a critical analysis. Policy Q. 2006;2(4).

Walker A. Active ageing: Realising its potential. Australas J Ageing. 2015;34:2–8.CrossRef

Arifin EN, Braun KL, Hogervorst E. Three pillars of active ageing in Indonesia. Asian Popul Stud. 2012;8:207–30.CrossRef

Boudiny K. ‘Active ageing’: from empty rhetoric to effective policy tool. Ageing Soc. 2013;33:1077–98.CrossRef

10.

Perales J, Martin S, Ayuso-Mateos JL, et al. Factors associated with active aging in Finland, Poland, and Spain. Int Psychogeriatrics. 2014;26:1363–75.CrossRef

11.

Fernández-Mayoralas G, Rojo-Pérez F, Martínez-Martín P, et al. Active ageing and quality of life: factors associated with participation in leisure activities among institutionalized older adults, with and without dementia. Aging Ment Health. 2015;19:1031–41.CrossRef

12.

Tam M. Active ageing, active learning: policy and provision in Hong Kong. Stud Contin Educ. 2011;33:289–99.CrossRef

13.

de São José JM, Timonen V, Amado CAF, Santos SP. A critique of the active ageing index. J Aging Stud. 2017;40:49–56. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaging.2017.01.001.CrossRefPubMed

14.

Foster L, A Walker - The, 2014 U Active and successful aging: A European policy perspective. academic.oup.com. Accessed 18 Dec 2019.

15.

Thanakwang K, Isaramalai S, Hatthakit U. Development and psychometric testing of the active aging scale for Thai adults. Clin Interv Aging. 2014;9:1211.CrossRef

16.

Rantanen T, Portegijs E, Kokko K, et al. Developing an assessment method of active aging: University of Jyvaskyla active aging scale. J Aging Health. 2019;31:1002–24.CrossRef

17.

Morrow-Howell N, Wang Y. Productive engagement of older adults: elements of a cross-cultural research agenda. Ageing Int. 2013;38:159–70.CrossRef

18.

Norouzian-Maleki S, Bell S, Hosseini SB, Faizi M. Developing and testing a framework for the assessment of neighbourhood liveability in two contrasting countries: Iran and Estonia. Ecol Indic. 2015;48:263–71. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2014.07.033.CrossRef

19.

Lak A, Rashidghalam P, Myint PK, Baradaran HR. Comprehensive 5P framework for active aging using the ecological approach: an iterative systematic review. BMC Public Health. 2020. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-019-8136-8.

20.

Salvo G, Lashewicz BM, Doyle-Baker PK, McCormack GR. Neighbourhood built environment influences on physical activity among adults: A systematized review of qualitative evidence. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2018;15(5):897.CrossRef

21.

Scharlach AE, Lehning AJ, Scharlach AE (2016) Ageing-friendly communities and social inclusion in the united ageing-friendly communities and social inclusion in the United States of America. cambridge.org 110–136. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0144686X12000578.

22.

Alley D, Liebig P, Pynoos J, et al. Creating elder-friendly communities. J Gerontol Soc Work. 2007;49:1–18. https://doi.org/10.1300/J083v49n01_01.CrossRefPubMed

23.

Barnett DW, Barnett A, Nathan A, et al. Built environmental correlates of older adults’ total physical activity and walking: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2017;14:103. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12966-017-0558-z.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

24.

De Souza LNN, De Carvalho PHB, Ferreira MEC. Quality of life and subjective well-being of physically active elderly people: a systematic review. J Phys Educ Sport. 2018;18:1615–23. https://doi.org/10.7752/jpes.2018.03237.CrossRef

25.

Annear M, Keeling S, Wilkinson T, et al. Environmental influences on healthy and active ageing: a systematic review. Ageing Soc. 2014;34:590–622. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0144686X1200116X.CrossRef

26.

Rimmer JH. Use of the ICF in identifying factors that impact participation in physical activity/rehabilitation among people with disabilities. Disabil Rehabil. 2006;28:1087–95. https://doi.org/10.1080/09638280500493860.CrossRefPubMed

27.

Garcia MA, Angel JL, Angel RJ, et al. Acculturation, gender, and active life expectancy in the Mexican-origin population. J Aging Health. 2015;27:1247–65. https://doi.org/10.1177/0898264315577880.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

28.

Mendoza-Núñez VM, de la Luz Martínez-Maldonado M, Correa-Muñoz E. Implementation of an active aging model in Mexico for prevention and control of chronic diseases in the elderly. BMC Geriatr. 2009;9:40. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2318-9-40.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

29.

da Silva W, Barbosa K, de Oliveira F, et al. Personal and behavioral determinants of active aging. Int Arch Med. 2016;9.

30.

Aird RL, Buys L. Active aging: Exploration into self-ratings of “being active,” out-of-home physical activity, and participation among older australian adults living in four different settings. J Aging Res. 2015;2015. https://doi.org/10.1155/2015/501823.

31.

Roberts E, Bishop A, Ruppert-Stroescu M, et al. Active aging for L.I.F.E. Top Geriatr Rehabil. 2017;33:211–22. https://doi.org/10.1097/TGR.0000000000000157.CrossRef

32.

Xu, J A Good Place to Age in Place? Exploring the relationships between the built environment, activity participation and healthy aging. 2018. (Doctoral dissertation).

33.

Filiatrault J, Bélanger E, Zunzunegui MV, et al. An empirical comparison of different models of active aging in Canada: the international mobility in aging study. Gerontologist. 2015. https://doi.org/10.1093/geront/gnv126.

34.

Cerin E, Nathan A, van Cauwenberg J, et al. The neighbourhood physical environment and active travel in older adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2017;14(1):1–23.CrossRef

35.

Plouffe L, Kalache A. Towards global age-friendly cities: determining urban features that promote active aging. J Urban Heal. 2010;87:733–9. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11524-010-9466-0.CrossRef

36.

Nyunt MSZ, Shuvo FK, Eng JY, et al. Objective and subjective measures of neighborhood environment (NE): relationships with transportation physical activity among older persons. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2015;12:108. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12966-015-0276-3.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

37.

Clarke P, George LK. The role of the built environment in the disablement process. Am J Public Health. 2005;95:1933–9. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2004.054494.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

38.

Morris KS, McAuley E, Motl RW. Self-efficacy and environmental correlates of physical activity among older women and women with multiple sclerosis. Health Educ Res. 2008;23:744–52. https://doi.org/10.1093/her/cym067.CrossRefPubMed

39.

DS, HA, BG-C, et al. The built environment and depression in later life: the health in men study. Am J Geriatr Psychiatry. 2011;19:461–70.CrossRef

40.

Roelofsen P. Healthy ageing and the built environment. Intell Build Int. 2014;6:3–10. https://doi.org/10.1080/17508975.2013.775097.CrossRef

41.

Quirk H, Crank H, Harrop D, et al. Understanding the experience of initiating community-based physical activity and social support by people with serious mental illness: a systematic review using a meta-ethnographic approach. Syst Rev. 2017;6:214. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-017-0596-2.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

42.

Rantanen T, Saajanaho M, Karavirta L, et al. Active aging – resilience and external support as modifiers of the disablement outcome: AGNES cohort study protocol. BMC Public Health. 2018;18:565. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-018-5487-5.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

43.

Kwok JYC, Ng KCH. User friendly living environmental research and Design for Older People. In: Designing inclusive futures. London: Springer London; 2008. p. 261–72.CrossRef

44.

Yung EHK, Conejos S, Chan EHW. Social needs of the elderly and active aging in public open spaces in urban renewal. Cities. 2016;52:114–22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2015.11.022.CrossRef

45.

Cunningham GO, Michael YL. Concepts guiding the study of the impact of the built environment on physical activity for older adults: a review of the literature. Am J Health Promot. 2004;18:435–43. https://doi.org/10.4278/0890-1171-18.6.435.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

46.

Temelová J, Dvořáková N. Residential satisfaction of elderly in the city Centre: the case of revitalizing neighbourhoods in Prague. Cities. 2012;29:310–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2011.11.015.CrossRef

47.

Afacan Y. Elderly-friendly inclusive urban environments: learning from Ankara. Open House Int. 2013;38:52–63.

48.

Elsawahli H, Shah Ali A, Ahmad F, Al-Obaidi KM. Evaluating potential environmental variables and active aging in older adults for age-friendly neighborhoods in Malaysia. J Hous Elderly. 2017;31:74–92. https://doi.org/10.1080/02763893.2016.1268560.CrossRef

49.

Tiraphat S, Peltzer K, Thamma-Aphiphol K, Suthisukon K. The role of age-friendly environments on quality of life among thai older adults. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2017;14. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph14030282.

50.

Noguchi M, Ma N, Woo C, et al. The usability study of a proposed environmental experience design framework for active ageing. Buildings. 2018;8:167. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings8120167.CrossRef

51.

Clarke P, Nieuwenhuijsen ER. Environments for healthy ageing: a critical review. Maturitas. 2009;64:14–9.CrossRef

52.

Swallow D, Cambridge H, Cinderby S, et al. Co-designing urban living solutions to improve older People’s mobility and well-being. J Urban Heal. 2018;95:409–22. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11524-018-0232-z.CrossRef

53.

Sonmez Turel H, Malkoc Yigit E, Altug I. Evaluation of elderly people’s requirements in public open spaces: a case study in Bornova District (Izmir, Turkey). Build Environ. 2007;42:2035–45. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2006.03.004.CrossRef

54.

Aneshensel CS, Harig F, Wight RG. Aging, neighborhoods, and the built environment. In: Handbook of aging and the social sciences: eighth edition; 2015. p. 315–35.

55.

Eisenberg Y, Vanderbom KA, Vasudevan V. Does the built environment moderate the relationship between having a disability and lower levels of physical activity? A systematic review. Prev Med (Baltim). 2017;95:S75–84. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ypmed.2016.07.019.CrossRef

56.

Karuppannan S, Sivam A, Koohsari M, Sivam A. Does urban design influence physical activity in the reduction of obesity? Rev Evid. 2012;5:14–21.

57.

Hunter RH, Sykes K, Lowman SG, et al. Environmental and policy change to support healthy aging. J Aging Soc Policy. 2011;23:354–71. https://doi.org/10.1080/08959420.2011.605642.CrossRefPubMed

58.

Lehne G, Bolte G. Equity impact of interventions to promote physical activity in older adults: protocol for a systematic review. Syst Rev. 2016;5:17. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-016-0194-8.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

59.

EC, RR, Tziraki C. AO - Chrysikou EO http://orcid. org/000.-0002–7894-6053 (2016) Perspectives on the role and synergies of architecture and social and built environment in enabling active healthy aging. J Aging Res 2016:6189349. https://doi.org/10.1155/2016/6189349.

60.

Keysor JJ, Jette AM, Lavalley MP, et al. Community environmental factors are associated with disability in older adults with functional limitations: the (MOST) study. J Gerontol - Ser A Biol Sci Med Sci. 2010;65(A):393–9. https://doi.org/10.1093/gerona/glp182.CrossRef

61.

Bauman A, Merom D, Bull FC, et al. Updating the Evidence for Physical Activity: Summative Reviews of the Epidemiological Evidence, Prevalence, and Interventions to Promote “Active Aging”. Gerontologist. 2016;56:S268–80. https://doi.org/10.1093/geront/gnw031.CrossRefPubMed

62.

Santinha G, Costa C, Diogo S. How are local policies promoting older People’s mobility? A case study. Urban Sci. 2018;2:63. https://doi.org/10.3390/urbansci2030063.CrossRef

63.

Li S-C, Lindenberger U, Hommel B, et al. Transformations in the couplings among intellectual abilities and constituent cognitive processes across the life span. Psychol Sci. 2004;15:155–63. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0956-7976.2004.01503003.x.CrossRefPubMed

64.

Michael YL, Green MK, Farquhar SA. Neighborhood design and active aging. Health Place. 2006;12:734–40. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.HEALTHPLACE.2005.08.002.CrossRefPubMed

65.

MJK, SM, KV, et al. Public open space, physical activity, urban design and public health: concepts, methods and research agenda. Heal Place. 2015;33:75–82. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.healthplace.2015.02.009.CrossRef

66.

Nagel CL, Carlson NE, Bosworth M, Michael YL. The relation between neighborhood built environment and walking activity among older adults. Am J Epidemiol. 2008;168:461–8. https://doi.org/10.1093/aje/kwn158.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

67.

Fadda G, Cortés A, Olivi A, Tovar M. The perception of the values of urban space by senior citizens of Valparaiso. J Aging Stud. 2010;24:344–57. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaging.2010.07.001.CrossRef

68.

Clarke P, Gallagher NA. Optimizing mobility in later life: the role of the urban built environment for older adults aging in place. J Urban Heal. 2013;90:997–1009. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11524-013-9800-4.CrossRef

69.

Clarke P, Ailshire JA, Lantz P. Urban built environments and trajectories of mobility disability: findings from a national sample of community-dwelling American adults (1986-2001). Soc Sci Med. 2009;69:964–70. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2009.06.041.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

70.

Van Cauwenberg J, Van Holle V, De Bourdeaudhuij I, et al. Neighborhood walkability and health outcomes among older adults: the mediating role of physical activity. Heal Place. 2016;37:16–25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.healthplace.2015.11.003.CrossRef

71.

Andersson JE. Architecture for the silver generation: exploring the meaning of appropriate space for ageing in a Swedish municipality. Heal Place. 2011;17:572–87. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.healthplace.2010.12.015.CrossRef

72.

Kerr J, Rosenberg D, Frank L. The role of the built environment in healthy aging. J Plan Lit. 2012;27:43–60. https://doi.org/10.1177/0885412211415283.CrossRef

73.

Borst HC, Graham JMA, van Dongen JEF, et al. Influence of environmental street characteristics on walking route choice of elderly people. J Environ Psychol. 2009;29:477–84. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2009.08.002.CrossRef

74.

Chan AC-M, Cao T. Age-friendly Neighbourhoods as civic participation: implementation of an active ageing policy in Hong Kong. J Soc Work Pract. 2015;29:53–68. https://doi.org/10.1080/02650533.2014.993947.CrossRef

75.

Sugiyama T, Thompson CW. Outdoor environments, activity and the well-being of older people: Conceptualising environmental support. Environ Plan A. 2007;39:1943–60. https://doi.org/10.1068/a38226.CrossRef

76.

Woo J, Chan R, Leung J, Wong M. Relative contributions of geographic, socioeconomic, and lifestyle factors to quality of life, frailty, and mortality in elderly. PLoS One. 2010;5:e8775. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0008775.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

77.

Li F, Fisher KJ, Brownson RC, Bosworth M. Multilevel modelling of built environment characteristics related to neighbourhood walking activity in older adults. J Epidemiol Community Health. 2005;59:558–64.CrossRef

78.

Veitch J, De Bourdeaudhuij I, Ghekiere A, et al. Park characteristics preferred for adolescent park visitation and physical activity: a choice-based conjoint analysis using manipulated photographs. Landsc Urban Plan. 2018;178:144–55. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2018.05.017.CrossRef

79.

SteelSteels S. Key characteristics of age-friendly cities and communities: A review. Cities. 2015;47:45–52. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2015.02.004.CrossRef

80.

Rioux L, Werner C. Residential satisfaction among aging people living in place. J Environ Psychol. 2011;31:158–69. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2010.12.001.CrossRef

81.

Garin N, Olaya B, Miret M, et al. Built environment and elderly population Health: a comprehensive literature review. Clin Pract Epidemiol Ment Heal. 2014;10:103–15. https://doi.org/10.2174/1745017901410010103.CrossRef

82.

TG, AWT, AP. A population-based survey of factors relating to the prevalence of falls in older people. Gerontology. 2005;51:340–5.CrossRef

83.

RM, AC, CM, TØ. Prevalence, awareness, treatment and control of hypertension in the elderly population of Singapore. Hypertens Res. 2010;33:1223–31. https://doi.org/10.1038/hr.2010.177.CrossRef

84.

Mishra V. Effect of indoor air pollution from biomass combustion on prevalence of asthma in the elderly. Environ Health Perspect. 2003;111:71–8.CrossRef

85.

Zanjari N, Sani MS, Chavoshi MH, et al. Successful aging as a multidimensional concept: an integrative review. Med J Islam Repub Iran. 2017;31:686–91.CrossRef

86.

Yen IH, Anderson LA. Built environment and mobility of older adults: important policy and practice efforts. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2012;60:951–6. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1532-5415.2012.03949.x.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

87.

Mendoza-Ruvalcaba NM, Fernández-Ballesteros R. Effectiveness of the vital aging program to promote active aging in Mexican older adults. Clin Interv Aging. 2016;11:1631–44. https://doi.org/10.2147/CIA.S102930.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

88.

Mokaberian M, Kashani V, Kashani K, Tajari SN. Comparison of the happiness of active and passive elderly women and men in Tehran. Growth Mobil J. 2014;6:183–94. https://doi.org/10.22059/JMLM.2014.50456.CrossRef

89.

Yur’yev A, Leppik L, Tooding L-M, et al. Social inclusion affects elderly suicide mortality. Int Psychogeriatrics. 2010;22:1337–43. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1041610210001614.CrossRef

90.

Mendes FR. Active ageing: a right or a duty? Heal Sociol Rev. 2013;22:174–85. https://doi.org/10.5172/hesr.2013.22.2.174.CrossRef

91.

Vandenbroucke F. Social justice and individual ethics in an open society: Equality, responsibility, and incentives. Springer Science & Business Media; 2012.

92.

Del Barrio E, Marsillas S, Buffel T, et al. From active aging to active citizenship: the role of (age) friendliness. Soc Sci. 2018;7:134. https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci7080134.CrossRef

93.

Hanson E, Magnusson L, Arvidsson H, et al. Working together with persons with early stage dementia and their family members to design a user-friendly technology-based support service. Dementia. 2007;6:411–34. https://doi.org/10.1177/1471301207081572.CrossRef

94.

McGarry P, Morris J. A great place to grow older: a case study of how Manchester is developing an age-friendly city. Work with Older People. 2011;15:38–46. https://doi.org/10.5042/wwop.2011.0119.CrossRef

95.

Zeitler E, Buys L, Aird R, Miller E. Mobility and active ageing in suburban environments: findings from in-depth interviews and person-based GPS tracking. Curr Gerontol Geriatr Res. 2012;2012:1–10. https://doi.org/10.1155/2012/257186.CrossRef

96.

Galea S, Freudenberg N, Vlahov D. Cities and population health. Soc Sci Med. 2005;60:1017–33. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.SOCSCIMED.2004.06.036.CrossRefPubMed

97.

Alpay LL, Toussaint PJ, Ezendam NPM, et al. Easing internet access of health information for elderly users. Health Informatics J. 2004;10:185–94. https://doi.org/10.1177/1460458204045416.CrossRef

98.

Masotti PJ, Fick R, Johnson-Masotti A, MacLeod S. Healthy naturally occurring retirement communities: a low-cost approach to facilitating healthy aging. Am J Public Health. 2006;96:1164–70. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2005.068262.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

99.

Paganini-Hill A. Aging in place in a retirement community: 90+ year olds. J Hous Elderly. 2013;27:191–205. https://doi.org/10.1080/02763893.2012.754822.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

100.

Tam M. A model of active ageing through elder learning: the elder academy network in Hong Kong. Educ Gerontol. 2013;39:250–8. https://doi.org/10.1080/03601277.2013.750931.CrossRef

101.

Taraghi Z, Ilali ES. A comparison of older adults’ and managers’ attitudes towards age-Friendly City indexes. Salmand. 2018:236–49. https://doi.org/10.32598/sija.13.2.236.

102.

Levasseur M, Dubois MF, Généreux M, et al. Capturing how age-friendly communities foster positive health, social participation and health equity: a study protocol of key components and processes that promote population health in aging Canadians. BMC Public Health. 2017;17. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-017-4392-7.

103.

Lui C-W, Everingham J-A, Warburton J, et al. What makes a community age-friendly: a review of international literature. Australas J Ageing. 2009;28:116–21. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-6612.2009.00355.x.CrossRefPubMed

104.

Temelová J, Slezáková A. The changing environment and neighbourhood satisfaction in socialist high-rise panel housing estates: the time-comparative perceptions of elderly residents in Prague. Cities. 2014;37:82–91. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2013.12.002.CrossRef

105.

Tzoulas K, Kaźmierczak A, James P, et al. Promoting ecosystem and human health in urban areas using Green infrastructure: a literature review. Landsc Urban Plan. 2007;81:167–78. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2007.02.001.CrossRef

106.

Alidoust S, Bosman C. Planning for an ageing population: links between social health, neighbourhood environment and the elderly. Aust Plan. 2015;52:177–86. https://doi.org/10.1080/07293682.2015.1034145.CrossRef

107.

Preston CC, Colman AM. Optimal number of response categories in rating scales: reliability, validity, discriminating power, and respondent preferences. Acta Psychol. 2000;104:1–15.CrossRef

108.

Woodcock T, Adeleke Y, Goeschel C, et al. A modified Delphi study to identify the features of high quality measurement plans for healthcare improvement projects. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2020;20:1–9.CrossRef

109.

Dalkey N. The Delphi method: An experimental study of group opinion. (No. RM-5888-PR). RAND CORP SANTA MONICA CALIF; 1969.

110.

Hsu C-C, Sandford BA. The Delphi technique: making sense of consensus. Pract assessment, Res Eval. 2007;12:1–8.

111.

Okoli C, Pawlowski SD. The Delphi method as a research tool: an example, design considerations and applications. Inf Manag. 2004;42:15–29.CrossRef

112.

Peffers K, Tuunanen T. Planning for IS applications: a practical, information theoretical method and case study in mobile financial services. Inf Manag. 2005;42:483–501.CrossRef

113.

Ludwig B. Predicting the future: have you considered using the Delphi methodology. J Ext. 1997;35:1–4.

114.

Esmaeilpoorarabi N, Yigitcanlar T, Guaralda M, Kamruzzaman M. Evaluating place quality in innovation districts: a Delphic hierarchy process approach. Land Use Policy. 2018;76:471–86. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2018.02.027.CrossRef

115.

Delbecq AL, de Ven AH, Gustafson DH. Group techniques for program planning: a guide to nominal group and Delphi processes. Glenview: Scott Foresman; 1975.

116.

Paúl C, Ribeiro O, Teixeira L. Active ageing: an empirical approach to the WHO model. Curr Gerontol Geriatr Res. 2012;2012:1–10. https://doi.org/10.1155/2012/382972.CrossRef

117.

Society ST-A&. 1999 undefined A culturally-relevant theoretical framework for the study of successful ageing. cambridge.org. Accessed 18 Dec 2019.

118.

Marsillas S, De Donder L, Kardol T, et al. Does active ageing contribute to life satisfaction for older people? Testing a new model of active ageing. Eur J Ageing. 2017;14:295–310. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10433-017-0413-8.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

119.

Boudiny K, Mortelmans D. A critical perspective: towards a broader understanding of’active ageing’. E-journal Appl Psychol. 2011;7:8–14.CrossRef

120.

Berg AI. Life satisfaction in late life: markers and predictors of level and change among 80+ year olds, Gothenburg: Department of Psychology; Psykologiska institutionen. Sweden: University of Gothenburg; 2008. (Dissertation).

121.

Society ST-A&, 1999 undefined A culturally-relevant theoretical framework for the study of successful ageing. cambridge.org. Accessed 18 Dec 2019.

122.

Oswald F, Jopp D, Rott C, et al Is aging in place a resource for or risk to life satisfaction? academic.oup.com. Accessed 18 Dec 2019.

123.

Walker A. A strategy for active ageing. Int Soc Secur Rev. 2002;55:121–39.CrossRef

Title: An ecological approach to the development of an active aging measurement in urban areas (AAMU)
Authors: Azadeh Lak
Parichehr Rashidghalam
S. Nouroddin Amiri
Phyo K. Myint
Hamid R. Baradaran
Publication date: 01-12-2021
Publisher: BioMed Central
Published in: BMC Public Health / Issue 1/2021
Electronic ISSN: 1471-2458
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-020-10036-5

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

An ecological approach to the development of an active aging measurement in urban areas (AAMU)

Abstract

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 1/2021

Identifying US County-level characteristics associated with high COVID-19 burden

The effect of depression status change on daily cigarette smoking amount according to sex: an eleven-year follow up study of the Korea Welfare Panel Study

“When you have a high life, and you like sex, you will be afraid”: a qualitative evaluation of adolescents’ decision to test for HIV in Zambia and Kenya using the health belief model

Unsuppressed viral load after intensive adherence counselling in rural eastern Uganda; a case of Kamuli district, Uganda

Assessment of self-medication practices in the context of the COVID-19 outbreak in Togo

The causal effect and impact of reproductive factors on breast cancer using super learner and targeted maximum likelihood estimation: a case-control study in Fars Province, Iran