Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32455789›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2020

Older Clients' Pathway through the Adaptation System for Independent Living in the UK.

Wusi Zhou, Adekunle Sabitu Oyegoke, Ming Sun, Hailong Zhu

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Wusi ZhouSchool of Public Administration, Hangzhou Normal University, Hangzhou 311121, China.
Adekunle Sabitu OyegokeSchool of Built Environment & Engineering, Leeds Beckett University, Leeds LS1 3HE, UK.
Ming SunSchool of Architecture, Design and the Built Environment, Nottingham Trent University, Nottingham NG1 4FQ, UK.
Hailong ZhuSchool of Public Administration, Hangzhou Normal University, Hangzhou 311121, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Housing adaptation is recognized as an effective intervention for successful independent living and has been given a greater political priority. However, the current adaptation implementation is fragmented and sometimes confusing. This study is aimed at examining blockages in the adaptation system in the United Kingdom (UK) and identifying practical ways to tackle them. It adopted a mixed-method sequential explanatory research strategy. A questionnaire survey was first conducted in all local authorities in England, Scotland and Wales. This was followed by individual interviews and a focus group with professionals and older clients. The study found that multiple organizations are involved during the delivery of housing adaptations; poor cooperation between them is a major barrier to a seamless service. The adaptation process involves five key stages; there are many inconsistencies and inequities in the process across local authorities. Significant delays are found at all stages, the average length of time taken to complete an adaptation is unacceptably long. There are also many inconsistencies and inequities across different local authorities. This study identified some common deficiencies, which cause inefficiencies and ineffectiveness in housing adaptation practices and makes some recommendations on specific actions that need to be taken at both national and local levels to address them.

Indexed as

HousingIndependent LivingAgedEnglandFocus GroupsHumansScotlandSurveys and QuestionnairesWalesaging in placeenvironmental gerontologyhousing adaptationolder people

Identifiers

PMID32455789
PMCPMC7277662

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.