ArticleJournal of the American Geriatrics Society2025
A portrait of older adults in naturally occurring retirement communities in Ontario, Canada: A population-based study.
Article in Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, 2025. 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.
- Factors associated with the engagement in meaningful activity and occupational balance in institutionalised older adults: a prospective observational cohort study.BMC geriatrics · 2026Observational
- Examining Multimorbidity in Older Adults Living in Naturally Occurring Retirement Communities, in Ontario, Canada, Using Latent Class Analysis.Journal of the American Geriatrics Society · 2026Article
- Exploring Technology Supporting Aging-in-Place Using an Equity Lens Through Focus Groups and World Café-Informed Research Agenda: Qualitative Study.JMIR aging · 2025Article
- A portrait of older adults in naturally occurring retirement communities in Ontario, Canada: A population-based study.Journal of the American Geriatrics Society · 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
14 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundNaturally occurring retirement communities (NORCs) are geographical areas that have naturally become home to a large concentration of older adults. This density means that NORCs have the potential to become a pillar for aging in place strategies, but at present, there is limited data on residents and their health needs. Our objective was to describe and compare the health and healthcare use of older adults living in high-rise NORC buildings to those in all other housing types in the community.
methodsWe conducted a population-based descriptive study of community-dwelling older adults aged ≥65 years by linking a provincial NORC registry in Ontario, Canada with health administrative records. Individuals were classified as NORC residents if their residential postal code on January 1, 2020 matched the NORC registry. Sociodemographic, clinical, and healthcare use characteristics were compared by NORC status using standardized differences (STD) and stratified by rurality, and further by age and sex in urban settings.
resultsOverall, 219,995 (7.7%) of 2,869,706 older adults were NORC residents. Compared to community-dwelling older adults, NORC residents were older (mean 77.4 vs 74.6 years; STD 0.34), and more were female (61.8% vs 52.2%; STD 0.19) and had low income (16.0% vs 9.3%; STD 0.11). NORC residents also had more active chronic conditions (mean 1.9 vs 1.5; STD 0.27), medications (mean 3.4 vs 2.8; STD 0.21), home care use (15.3% vs 9.8%; STD 0.17), and primary care visits (mean 9.7 vs 7.6 visits in prior 2 years; STD 0.22). Findings were robust across rurality, age, and sex.
conclusionsOur findings suggest that NORC residents have greater health needs than other older adults living in the community and underscore NORCs as important targets for equity-focused strategies to support aging in place.
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.