Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Social exclusion and well-being among older adults in rural and urban areas
Stockholm University, Faculty of Social Sciences, Aging Research Center (ARC), (together with KI). Dalarna University, Sweden.ORCID iD: 0000-0002-7685-3216
Number of Authors: 22018 (English)In: Archives of gerontology and geriatrics (Print), ISSN 0167-4943, E-ISSN 1872-6976, Vol. 79, p. 176-184Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Background: Social exclusion (SE) is a process that limits participation in society across life domains, and is associated with poor quality of life. Neighbourhood exclusion has been identified as particularly important for older adults. This paper examines the association between SE and well-being in older adults from urban and rural areas, focusing on neighbourhood exclusion. Methods: Using a cross-sectional survey design with a stratified sampling frame, participants (aged 65+) from rural (n = 628) and urban (n = 627) areas of Barnsley, United Kingdom, completed a questionnaire containing indicators of five SE domains: civic activity, material resources, social relationships, services and neighbourhood. Sequential multiple regression models were developed for 1) total sample; 2) rural areas; and 3) urban areas, with well-being regressed on SE indicators after controlling for self-reported health. Results: SE indicators explained 13.4% of the variance in well-being in the total sample (of which neighbourhood exclusion explained 1.2%); corresponding figures for the rural model were 13.8% (3.8%) and for the urban model 18.0% (1.7%); the addition of neighbourhood exclusion significantly improved all three models. Five SE indicators were significant in the rural model, compared with seven in the urban model, with four common to both. Discussion: Neighbourhood exclusion explained more variance in well-being in rural than urban areas, whereas exclusion from services explained more variance in urban than rural areas. Area characteristics and the role of neighbourhood should be considered in policy initiatives to reduce SE and promote well-being.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2018. Vol. 79, p. 176-184
Keywords [en]
Older people, Social exclusion, Well-being, Quality of life, Life satisfaction, Community, Rural, Urban, Neighbourhood
National Category
Gerontology, specialising in Medical and Health Sciences
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:su:diva-162113DOI: 10.1016/j.archger.2018.08.007ISI: 000447149300028PubMedID: 30265913OAI: oai:DiVA.org:su-162113DiVA, id: diva2:1263342
Available from: 2018-11-15 Created: 2018-11-15 Last updated: 2018-11-15Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

Other links

Publisher's full textPubMed

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Dahlberg, Lena
By organisation
Aging Research Center (ARC), (together with KI)
In the same journal
Archives of gerontology and geriatrics (Print)
Gerontology, specialising in Medical and Health Sciences

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn
Total: 50 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf