Scoping review identifies gaps in assessing urban spaces for older adults, indicating a need for improvement.
Despite an ageing society emerging as a global challenge, urban spaces still do not adequately address the spatial needs of older citizens. Numerous studies analyse built environment characteristics in relation to the mobility of older citizens, yet studies on the quality of older pedestrians’ perception of spatial attributes with their levels are scarce. This scoping review of 2855 records from 2013 to 2023, exported from Scopus and Web of Science, aimed to identify common patterns with respect to the aspects used in the assessment of the quality of urban spaces for older adults, with the emphasis placed on spatial attributes measured through different levels. Following PRISMA-ScR, the analysis was conducted in AsReview, a scientific tool using ML. Inclusion criteria were: peer-reviewed English-language journal articles and conference papers; the inclusion of spatial attributes in urban planning, measuring the perception of pedestrians, using a conjoint experiment, or urban digital twins; and taking into account an ageing society. The author performed the coding of 115 eligible records in four iterative rounds with the use of Atlas.ti. The findings show that Land Use & Buildings/Destinations, Sidewalk and Amenities, and Aesthetics/Urban Form were the most frequently occurring aspects. Attribute levels were proposed only in 10 records. No study incorporated stated preference and 3D walk-through environments to quantify older adults’ perception of walkability-related attributes. This represents a methodological gap for future research on older adults’ walkability perception. Urban planners and other decision-makers may use the findings of this study to support the design and management of age-friendly, sustainable, and inclusive street environments.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Agnieszka Ptak-Wojciechowska (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: