ArticleBMC geriatrics2026
Mixed methods implementation evaluation of community-based intergenerational program to improve the quality of life of the elderly in rural Maharashtra.
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
16 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe global rise in aging populations has introduced challenges such as increased social isolation and weakened intergenerational relationships. Intergenerational programs (IGPs) offer some promising strategies to address these issues by encouraging interactions between the older and younger generations by fostering mutual learning, support, and understanding. This study evaluated the feasibility and impact of a community-based intergenerational program in rural Maharashtra, India, with a particular focus on improving the overall well-being of the elderly individuals. METHODOLOGY: A mixed-methods approach was used to evaluate the implementation of community-driven IGP strategies in 18 villages via qualitative methods (in-depth interviews, focus group discussions, force field analysis, spider web analysis, and most significant change stories) and quantitative assessments (quality of Life, generativity, social capital and self-care assessment tools) across 3 years. Stratified random sampling was used to recruit 520 participants across two elderly age groups (60-70 years and > 70 years).
resultsThe qualitative data revealed that IGPs improved intergenerational relationships, enhanced communication and appreciation for joint family structures. The key facilitators included community engagement, peer trainers, cultural events, and active involvement from local leaders. Barriers included conflicting agricultural responsibilities, health issues, and limited intergenerational interaction due to mobile use. In the 60-70 years age group, the quality of Life scores was 70.6 at baseline and 68.5 by year 3, the generativity scores was 32.3 at baseline and 28 by year 3, and the social capital scores was 48.3 at baseline to 48.4 by year 3. In the > 70 years age group, the quality of Life score ranged from 66.9 at baseline to 65.4 by year 3, and the generativity scores was 31.8 at baseline and 26.1 at year 3. The social capital score was 45.2 at baseline and 45.5 by year 3. The self-care score was 127 for the 60-70 years age group and 125 for the > 70 years age group at baseline, and 106 for the 60-70 years age group and 103 for the > 70-years age group by year 3. Child-caregiver interactions for the 60 to 70 year-old age group (8.61 at baseline and 9.13 by year 3) and for the > 70-year-old group (9.23 at baseline to 7.74 by year 3).
conclusionCommunity based intergenerational project offer a promising approach to address social isolation and promote well-being in elderly individuals while also enhancing intergenerational connections and community resilience.
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.