Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37887643›Full record

ReviewInternational journal of environmental research and public health2023

Implications of Aging in Place in the Context of the Residential Environment: Bibliometric Analysis and Literature Review.

Eugene Seo, Sanghee Lee

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review 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 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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.

Eugene SeoDepartment of Architecture, Kwangwoon University, Seoul 01897, Republic of Korea.ORCID 0000-0002-1128-864X
Sanghee LeeDepartment of Architecture, Kwangwoon University, Seoul 01897, Republic of Korea.ORCID 0000-0002-1956-4530

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The residential environment's impact on aging in place is a multidisciplinary field that draws from architecture, urban planning, gerontology, psychology, and sociology. This multidisciplinary nature makes it challenging to comprehensively understand the field and identify the connections and interactions among disciplines. A bibliometric analysis is crucial for exploring the field's intellectual structure, identifying interdisciplinary collaborations, and tracking the knowledge flow across disciplines and will facilitate cross-disciplinary dialogue, foster collaboration, and encourage research that integrates diverse perspectives. This study reviewed the literature on aging in place in the context of a residential environment, which required adapting theories and methodologies. It analyzed a dataset of 1500 publications retrieved from the Web of Science, applied performance analysis techniques, and utilized VOSviewer to visualize the intellectual structure and evolving research themes. The results emphasize the increasing strength of academic interest and the growing diversity of fields related to the topic. The findings are discussed in terms of productivity, collaboration, and research themes from the past to the future. The results provide a roadmap for researchers, policymakers, and practitioners worldwide who focus on aging in place and acknowledge the importance of considering the physical, social, and cultural aspects of an older adult's living environment.

Indexed as

GeriatricsIndependent LivingBibliometricsEnvironmentSocial Environmentaging at homeaging in communityaging in placebibliometric analysisresidential environments

Identifiers

PMID37887643
PMCPMC10606307

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.