Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34036119›Full record

ReviewGerontology & geriatric medicine

Promising Aging in Community Models in the U.S.: Village, Naturally Occurring Retirement Community (NORC), Cohousing, and University-Based Retirement Community (UBRC).

Su-I Hou, Xian Cao

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Gerontology & geriatric medicine. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing 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

10 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Healthcare and Social Needs of Older Adults in Underserved Urban Communities: Insights from Community Health Workers.Journal of urban health : bulletin of the New York Academy of Medicine · 2025
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Healthcare Professionals' Perceptions of Loneliness amongst Older Adults: A Qualitative Study.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021
    Article
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

2 authors.

Su-I HouUniversity of Central Florida, Orlando, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4519-0974
Xian CaoUniversity of Central Florida, Orlando, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Aging in Community (AIC) is the preferred way to age. This systematic review identified promising AIC models in the U.S. and analyzed model characteristics and push-pull factors from older adults' perspectives. Push factors are those driving older adults to leave, while pull factors attract them to stay in a community. We conducted a two-phase search strategy using eight databases. Phase I identified promising AIC models and Phase II expanded each specific model identified. Fifty-two of 244 screened articles met the criteria and were analyzed. We identified four promising AIC models with the potential to achieve person-environment (P-E) fit, including village, naturally occurring retirement community (NORC), cohousing, and university-based retirement community (UBRC). Each has a unique way of helping older adults with their aging needs. Similar and unique push-pull factors of each AIC model were discussed. Analyses showed that pull factors were mostly program factors while push factors were often individual circumstances. Continued research is needed to address the challenges of recruiting minority older adults and those of lower socio-economic status, meeting older adults' diverse and dynamic needs, and conducting comparative studies to share lessons learned across the globe.

Indexed as

aging in communitycohousingnaturally occurring retirement communityuniversity-based retirement communityvillage

Identifiers

PMID34036119
PMCPMC8127739

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.