ArticlePsychogeriatrics : the official journal of the Japanese Psychogeriatric Society2024
Helping behaviours of community members towards older adults and the related factors: a cross-sectional study.
Article in Psychogeriatrics : the official journal of the Japanese Psychogeriatric Society, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Integrating Project-Based Learning and Experiential Learning to Enhance Learning Outcomes in Long-Term Care Courses.Florence Nightingale journal of nursing · 2026Article
- Relationships between elementary school children's experiences in helping older adults and their attitudes toward individuals with dementia and intention to help: A cross-sectional survey aiming to develop age-friendly education.Geriatrics & gerontology international · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundCommunity members can play important roles in helping older adults in their community. This study aimed to clarify the actual situation of community members' helping behaviours towards older adults and examine the related factors.
methodsThis cross-sectional study was conducted using an online survey system with a sample of 1000 community members in the Tokyo metropolitan area selected using quota sampling. Participants were asked about their experiences with helping an older adult, involvement with older adults with dementia, knowledge of dementia and care resources in the community, and perceptions regarding the community. Content analysis was used to classify participants' freely answered responses about helping behaviours, with logistic regression analysis subsequently used to examine the related factors.
resultsCommunity members provided older adults with various types of spontaneous help, including help with walking (20.0%), accident care (16.8%), giving directions to a destination (11.6%), accompanying them to a destination (12.9%), and support in daily life (10.4%). In the multinominal logistic regression analysis, advanced helping behaviours were associated with having a family member with dementia, experiences involving people living with dementia, knowledge of dementia and community support centres, and a stronger sense of community integration (P < 0.05). The reasons for not being able to help included being physically unable to (42.5%), not feeling responsible (19.3%), not knowing how to help (17.4%), and hesitating to help (14.4%).
conclusionThe results suggest that providing learning opportunities for community members could further promote their helping behaviours for older adults. These could include interacting with older adults, especially those living with dementia; promoting a sense of community integration; or receiving training in helping actions. Such efforts could support the development of an effective community-based care system for older adults.
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.