↓ Skip to main content

Importance of proximity to resources, social support, transportation and neighborhood security for mobility and social participation in older adults: results from a scoping study

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Public Health, May 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (91st percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (87th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
19 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
280 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
571 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Importance of proximity to resources, social support, transportation and neighborhood security for mobility and social participation in older adults: results from a scoping study
Published in
BMC Public Health, May 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12889-015-1824-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Mélanie Levasseur, Mélissa Généreux, Jean-François Bruneau, Alain Vanasse, Éric Chabot, Claude Beaulac, Marie-Michèle Bédard

Abstract

Since mobility and social participation are key determinants of health and quality of life, it is important to identify factors associated with them. Although several investigations have been conducted on the neighborhood environment, mobility and social participation, there is no clear integration of the results. This study aimed to provide a comprehensive understanding regarding how the neighborhood environment is associated with mobility and social participation in older adults. A rigorous methodological scoping study framework was used to search nine databases from different fields with fifty-one keywords. Data were exhaustively analyzed, organized and synthesized according to the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) by two research assistants following PRISMA guidelines, and results were validated with knowledge users. The majority of the 50 selected articles report results of cross-sectional studies (29; 58 %), mainly conducted in the US (24; 48 %) or Canada (15; 30 %). Studies mostly focused on neighborhood environment associations with mobility (39; 78 %), social participation (19; 38 %), and occasionally both (11; 22 %). Neighborhood attributes considered were mainly 'Pro ducts and technology' (43; 86 ) and 'Services, systems and policies' (37; 74 %), but also 'Natural and human-made changes' (27; 54 %) and 'Support and relationships' (21; 42 %). Mobility and social participation were both positively associated with Proximity to resources and recreational facilities, Social support, Having a car or driver's license, Public transportation and Neighborhood security, and negatively associated with Poor user-friendliness of the walking environment and Neighborhood insecurity. Attributes of the neighborhood environment not covered by previous research on mobility and social participation mainly concerned 'Attitudes', and 'Services, systems and policies'. Results from this comprehensive synthesis of empirical studies on associations of the neighborhood environment with mobility and social participation will ultimately support best practices, decisions and the development of innovative inclusive public health interventions including clear guidelines for the creation of age-supportive environments. To foster mobility and social participation, these interventions must consider Proximity to resources and to recreational facilities, Social support, Transportation, Neighborhood security and User-friendliness of the walking environment. Future studies should include both mobility and social participation, and investigate how they are associated with 'Attitudes', and 'Services, systems and policies' in older adults, including disadvantaged older adults.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 19 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 571 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 3 <1%
Japan 2 <1%
Brazil 2 <1%
Indonesia 1 <1%
Ireland 1 <1%
Switzerland 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Unknown 559 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 96 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 91 16%
Researcher 62 11%
Student > Bachelor 52 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 41 7%
Other 89 16%
Unknown 140 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 104 18%
Nursing and Health Professions 79 14%
Medicine and Dentistry 64 11%
Psychology 32 6%
Sports and Recreations 15 3%
Other 101 18%
Unknown 176 31%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 18. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 19 January 2020.
All research outputs
#1,885,060
of 24,278,128 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#2,108
of 16,003 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#24,260
of 271,903 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#30
of 235 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,278,128 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 16,003 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 271,903 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 235 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.