ReviewHERD2023
Residential Environments for Older Persons: A Comprehensive Literature Review (2005-2022).
Review in HERD, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- How storey configuration and number of transition points shape opportunities for outdoor access in residential care facilities: implications for age-friendly environments.BMC geriatrics · 2026Article
- Microbial landscape: composition and health associations of environmental microbiome in key functional spaces of premium elderly care facilities.Microbiology spectrum · 2026Article
- Article
- Exploring public attitudes of continuing care retirement communities in China: a sentiment analysis of China's social media Weibo.Frontiers in public health · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIndependent noninstitutional and institutional residential long-term care environments for older persons have been the subject of significant empirical and qualitative research in the 2005-2022 period. A comprehensive review of this literature is reported, summarizing recent advancements in this rapidly expanding body of knowledge. PURPOSE AND
aimThis comprehensive review conceptually structures the recent literature on environment and aging to provide conceptual clarity and identify current and future trends. METHOD AND
resultEach source reviewed was classified as one of the five types-opinion piece/essay, cross-sectional empirical investigation, nonrandomized comparative investigation, randomized study, and policy review essay-within eight content categories: community-based aging in place; residentialism; nature, landscape, and biophilia; dementia special care units; voluntary/involuntary relocation; infection control/COVID-19, safety/environmental stress; ecological and cost-effective best practices; and recent design trends and prognostications.
conclusionsAmong the findings embodied in the 204 literature sources reviewed, all-private room long-term care residential units are generally safer and provide greater privacy and personal autonomy to residents, the deleterious impacts of involuntary relocation continue, family engagement in policy making and daily routines has increased, multigenerational independent living alternatives are increasing, the therapeutic role of nature and landscape is increasingly well-documented, ecological sustainability has increased in priority, and infection control measures are of high priority in the wake of the coronavirus pandemic. Discussion of the results of this comprehensive review sets the stage for further research and design advancements on this subject in light of the rapid aging of societies around the globe.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.