Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36674071›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2023

Living in an Age-Friendly Community: Evidence from a Masterplanned Development in Southwest Sydney.

Alasdair Jones, Susan Parham

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
1.7field-weighted citation impact, top 17% of its field
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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. 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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Alasdair JonesHuman Geography, Department of Geography, University of Exeter, Exeter EX4 4RJ, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-4933-4023
Susan ParhamUrbanism and Planning, University of Hertfordshire, Hatfield AL10 9EU, UK.
University of Exeter · GBUniversity of Hertfordshire · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This paper is situated at the interface of a growing urban studies literature concerned with 'masterplanning' practices in urban planning and another, hitherto relatively discrete, body of research concerned with age-friendly cities and communities. The authors are interested in exploring a gap in aging in place literature around how neighbourhoods and residential settings developed with aging in place principles in mind are experienced and perceived by residents. To explore this research gap, the authors analyse qualitative (primarily interview and focus group) data collected in Park Central, a masterplanned development located in the Campbelltown suburb in the southwest region of the Sydney metropolitan area, Australia. This development was delivered in response to a need identified by the state's land and property development agency, Landcom, for more diverse and affordable medium-density housing in Campbelltown. In particular, a need was identified for housing developments that would be able to sustainably accommodate the changing lifestyle needs of a maturing population in the region. Drawing on our thematic analysis of our data, we discern three key themes in research participants' experiences of Park Central as a place for aging. These themes are elaborated via recourse to excerpts from our data and discussed with a view to informing how the conception, development and practice of further age-friendly communities is approached.

Indexed as

AgingIndependent LivingAgedCitiesFocus GroupsHousingHumansage-friendly communitiesaging in placebuilt environmentmasterplanningqualitative researchresidential environmentsurban planning

Identifiers

PMID36674071
PMCPMC9859270
OpenAlexW4315649274

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.