Introduction In 2006, the World Health Organization launched the Global Age-Friendly Cities Project to support active aging. Canada has a large number of age-friendly initiatives; however, little is known about the effectiveness and outcomes of age-friendly community (AFC) initiatives. In addition, stakeholders report that they lack the capacity and tools to develop and conduct evaluations of their AFC initiatives. In order to address these gaps, the Public Health Agency of Canada developed indicators to support the evaluation of AFC initiatives relevant to a wide range of Canadian communities. These indicators meet the varied needs of communities, but are not designed to evaluate collective impact or enable crosscommunity comparisons. Methods An evidence-based, iterative consultation approach was used to develop indicators for AFCs. This involved a literature review and an environmental scan. Two rounds of key expert and stakeholder consultations were conducted to rate potential indicators according to their importance, actionability and feasibility. A final list of indicators and potential measures were developed based on results from these consultations, as well as key policy considerations. Results Thirty-nine indicators emerged across eight AFC domains plus four indicators related to long-term health and social outcomes. All meet the intended purpose of evaluating AFC initiatives at the community level. A user-friendly guide is available to support and share this work. Conclusion The AFC indicators can help communities evaluate age-friendly initiatives, which is the final step in completing a cycle of the Pan-Canadian AFC milestones. Communities are encouraged to use the evaluation results to improve their AFC initiatives, thereby benefiting a broad range of Canadians.
IntroductionTo examine the effectiveness of universal suicide prevention interventions on reducing suicide mortality in high-income Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) member countries.MethodsWe implemented a comprehensive search strategy across three electronic databases: MEDLINE (Ovid), PsycINFO (Ovid) and Embase (Ovid). All studies using time-series, retrospective, prospective, pre–post or cross-sectional study designs were included. Studies were required to examine suicide mortality as the outcome of interest. To help organise the results, studies were grouped into six broad categories of universal interventions consistent with the World Health Organization (WHO) Comprehensive Mental Health Action Plan. A narrative synthesis of results was used to describe the findings.ResultsOf the 15 641 studies identified through the search strategy, 100 studies were eligible in the following categories: law and regulation reforms (n=66), physical barriers (n=13), community-based interventions (n=9), communication strategies (n=4), mental health policies and strategies (n=7), and access to healthcare (n=1). Overall, 100% (13/13) of the included physical barrier interventions resulted in a significant reduction in suicide mortality. Although only 70% (46/66) of the law and regulation reform interventions had a significant impact on reducing suicide, they hold promise due to their extended reach. Universal suicide prevention interventions seem to be more effective at reducing suicide among males than females, identifying a need to stratify results by sex in future studies.ConclusionsThese findings suggest that universal suicide prevention interventions hold promise in effectively reducing suicide mortality in high-income OECD countries.
Introduction En 2006, l’Organisation mondiale de la Santé (OMS) a lancé le projet mondial « Villes-amies des aînés » afin de favoriser un vieillissement actif. Si un grand nombre d’initiatives « amies des aînés » ont été mises en oeuvre au Canada, on dispose de peu d’information sur l’efficacité et les résultats des initiatives des collectivités-amies des aînés (CAA). En outre, les intervenants affirment qu’ils n’ont pas la capacité et les outils nécessaires pour élaborer et réaliser des évaluations relatives à leurs initiatives de CAA. Afin de pallier ces lacunes, l’Agence de la santé publique du Canada a mis au point des indicateurs pour l’évaluation des initiatives de CAA dans de nombreuses collectivités canadiennes. Ces indicateurs, destinés à répondre aux différents besoins des collectivités, ne sont pas conçus pour faire l’évaluation de répercussions collectives ou pour rendre possible une comparaison entre collectivités. Méthodologie Une démarche de consultation itérative fondée sur des données probantes a été employée pour l’élaboration d’indicateurs relatifs aux CAA. Elle a nécessité une revue de la littérature et une analyse du contexte. Deux rondes de consultation auprès d’experts et d’intervenants clés ont été menées, ce qui a permis de classer les indicateurs potentiels en fonction de leur importance, de leur capacité à être mis en pratique et de leur faisabilité. Une liste définitive d’indicateurs et de mesures potentielles a ensuite été mise au point, en fonction des résultats de ces consultations et de considérations clés relatives aux politiques. Résultats Trente-neuf indicateurs répartis en huit domaines relevant des CAA et quatre indicateurs relevant des résultats liés à la santé et aux conditions sociales à long terme ont été sélectionnés. Tous sont conformes à l’objectif énoncé, à savoir l’évaluation des initiatives de CAA à l’échelon local. Un guide convivial est disponible pour soutenir et diffuser ce travail. Conclusion Les indicateurs de CAA sont susceptibles d’aider les collectivités à procéder à l’évaluation de leurs initiatives amies des aînés, ce qui constitue la dernière étape du cycle des jalons pancanadiens des CAA. Les collectivités sont en effet encouragées à améliorer leurs initiatives amies des aînés à partir de l’évaluation de leurs résultats, afin d’en faire profiter un large éventail de Canadiens.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2025 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.