SynthesisThe Gerontologist2026
How is housing insecurity measured among older adults? A systematic review.
Synthesis in The Gerontologist, 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
objectivesHousing insecurity is an established social determinant of health, with older adults being disproportionately vulnerable. Despite growing research attention, no studies have reviewed the measurement tools existing specifically for this population. This systematic review synthesizes quantitative measures of housing insecurity used among older adults, examines their dimensional structures, and evaluates their psychometric properties. RESEARCH DESIGN AND
methodsFollowing PRISMA 2020 guidelines, a systematic search was conducted across 5 electronic databases with no date restrictions. Eligible studies were required to include samples of older adults or mixed-age adults without an upper age limit, employ quantitative housing insecurity measures, and report psychometric evaluation.
resultsA total of 1,310 articles were retrieved initially, and 13 studies were included in the final review. Most studies constructed composite indices from secondary survey data rather than purpose-built instruments. Six core dimensions were identified: housing unaffordability, instability, poor physical quality, inadequacy, lack or disrepair of housing durables, and poor neighborhood quality. Age-friendly housing characteristics were incorporated in only one study. Internal consistency was reported in two studies and test-retest reliability in none, with validity evidence largely confined to informal content justifications. DISCUSSION AND IMPLICATIONS: The reviewed tools showed considerable fragmentation in measurement approaches, uneven dimensional coverage, and insufficient psychometric reporting. The near-universal absence of age-friendly indicators across reviewed tools presents a notable gap. Future research may benefit from developing purpose-built, comprehensively validated instruments that integrate aging-specific dimensions across diverse policy and cultural contexts.
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.