ArticleBMC geriatrics2026
Government interventions and elderly health: a mixed-methods health impact assessment of a rural welfare program.
Article in BMC geriatrics, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThis Health Impact Assessment (HIA) study aimed to explain and evaluate the impacts of the Shahid Rajaei plan (SRP) on rural older adult’s health in Piranshahr County, Iran, and offers recommendations for strengthening the plan and promoting the health of older adults.
methodIn this retrospective HIA study, a concurrent mixed-methods approach was conducted in three phases: (1) A quantitative phase consisted of a ten-year (2009–2019) trend analysis and a cross-sectional comparative study among covered / non-covered older adults to assess their health status. (2) A qualitative phase with a conventional content analysis approach to identify the perspectives of rural older adults and the SRP stakeholders about the weaknesses and strengths of the plan. (3) An integration phase with a comparative analysis approach to integrate quantitative and qualitative results to provide a set of recommendations to guide decisions and actions.
resultsOver the 10-year period, both groups experienced increasing trends in blood pressure, diabetes, depression, anxiety, and stroke. However, changes in blood pressure, diabetes, depression, and anxiety were significantly more pronounced in the non-covered group (P < 0.001), with respective risks 30, 10, 2.7, and 2.6 times higher than the SRP-covered group. Stroke trends did not differ significantly (P = 0.156). Cross-sectional analysis showed better perceived social support and general health in the non-covered group, while quality of life and social health were significantly higher in the SRP-covered group (P < 0.001).Qualitative content analysis led to the identification of two main categories “Advantages and strengths program” and “limitations and weaknesses” along with five subcategories. The integration phase combined the quantitative and qualitative findings for a comprehensive interpretation.The integration phase combined the quantitative and qualitative findings for a comprehensive interpretation.
conclusionAlthough the SRP has had positive effects on elderly health, certain limitations, such as restricted access to specialized services and unequal service distribution, have hindered its full potential in promoting health. The findings indicate that elderly health outcomes are influenced not only by healthcare interventions but also by broader economic and social factors. Therefore, improving living conditions and enhancing public welfare are essential steps toward achieving the SRP’s goals.
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.