Table 2.

Characteristics of the articles on neighborhood environment, mobility and social participation in older adults

Reference number	Country	Setting	Design	Population (sample size; age; median*; (mean age))	Objective
[9]	United States	Urban	Mixed	(638; 65 +)	To explore the intricate relationships between neighborhood walkability, third place engagement, and socio-demographic characteristics and their combined influence on the frequency of leisure-time physical activity and social capital among older adults.
[52]	Singapore	Urban	Qualitative	(25; 65+)	To use a participatory methodology to explore the determinants of an age-friendly neighborhood-built environment that promotes or limits healthy ageing in place among seniors residing in a low-income urban community in Singapore.
[53]	United States	Urban	Mixed	(35; 65+)	To evaluate the key elements to finding one’s way back in order to ensure the mobility and participation of seniors in urban areas.
[54]	Singapore	Urban	Qualitative	(12; 55–80)	To explore the neighborhood environmental factors that influence older adults’ out-of-home behaviors (OOHBs) in Yuhua East, Singapore.
[55]	Singapore	Urban	Qualitative	(30; 55 +) 63.3% were ≥ 65 years old	To examine how the physical and social neighborhood environment influences older adults’ physical activities, social participation, and their intersection (i.e., when both occur together).
[56]	Canada	Urban	Mixed	(15; 60 +)	To explore the factors that influence access to and use of urban greenways among older and disadvantaged adults in Québec City, Canada.
[57]	Canada	Urban + Rural + Suburban	Quantitative (Cross-sectional)	(4613; 65 +)	This study explored associations between neighborhood characteristics and frequency of participation in three social activities among older adults and interactions between neighborhood characteristics and mobility limitation as they relate to participation.
[58]	China	Urban	Qualitative	(38; 60 + (72.8))	To investigate older adults’ perceptions of their walking experiences using the social-ecological model as a framework.
[59]	Australia	Urban	Qualitative and clinical randomized trial	(315; 65 +)	To investigate relationships between health, fall-related risk factors, perceived neighborhood walkability, and walking behavior in older adults.
[60]	Canada	Urban	Qualitative	(6; 77–89; 82*; (82.5))	To understand how neighborhoods as physical and social environments influence community mobility.
[61]	Singapore	Urban	Mixed	(402; 55+; (69.1))	To assess the use of both perceived assessments and objective GIS measures of the neighborhood environment to examine their independent and combined associations with transportation physical activity among community dwelling elderly in Singapore.
[62]	Denmark	Urban	Mixed	(353; 50–90 (66.7))	To investigate the relationship between built environment features, social interaction, and walking activity among older adults in Neighborhood Open Spaces (NOS) in a low socio-economic neighborhood in Copenhagen.
[63]	Canada	Urban	Quantitative (Longitudinal)	(16 735; 65 +)	To explore the links between the residential neighborhood and the social participation of older people.
[64]	Canada	Urban + Rural + Suburban	Qualitative	(28; 65 +; (73.3))	To explore whether there is merit in the components and relationships described in the LEAAF among community-dwelling older adults.
[65]	United Kingdom	Urban + Rural	Qualitative	(14; 75–88)	To understand how older adults (over 70) interact with their local neighborhoods using a qualitative geographical information systems (QGIS) approach.
[66]	Israel	Urban + Rural	Mixed	(263; 65 +)	To examine the different variables that can have an impact on social participation, i.e. the environment and mobility, in addition to comparing rural and urban areas.
[67]	Portugal	Urban	Mixed	(850; 60 +; (71.7))	To explore the integration of sustainable mobility and universal design principles in the co-design of an accessible bus stop at Faro International Airport, with input from older adults and people with disabilities.
[68]	Australia	Suburban	Qualitative	(10; 64–83; 72*)	To identify enablers and barriers to participation in community-based activities experienced by active older adults.
[69]	New Zealand	Rural	Qualitative	(15; 85+; (88.1))	To understand the influence the physical and social environments have on enabling those aged 85 years and over to remain engaged in a rural community.
[70]	South Korea	Urban	Qualitative	(46; 65 +; (75.4))	To assess the attributes of a perceived urban neighborhood environment for the physical activity (PA) of older adults by applying a qualitative multimethod approach to collect both descriptive and spatial information.
[71]	China	Urban + Rural	Quantitative (Longitudinal)	(8408; 50 + (61.7))	To investigate the associations between residential greenness and the risk of disability in older adults in China.
[72]	Australia	Rural	Qualitative	(23; 50 + (76.2))	To explore the barriers and facilitators to social participation and the experience of loneliness among older adults in a rural Australian setting, from both individual and organizational perspectives.
[73]	Japan	Urban	Quantitative (Cross-sectional)	(214; 59–94; (73.8))	To investigate the association of built environments with frequency of going outdoors among older community-dwelling adults in Japan.
[74]	Belgium	Urban + Rural + Suburban	Mixed	(50 986; 65 +; (74.3))	To investigate the relationship between the perceived social environment and daily walking for transportation in older adults, while adjusting for individual and perceived physical environmental factors.
[75]	Germany	Suburban	Qualitative	(2559; 60 +)	To examine the association between frailty and individual, physical, and social environmental factors among Chinese older adults.
[76]	Canada	Urban	Quantitative (Cross-sectional)	(213; 65 +)	To examine the association between neighborhood-built environment (specifically, walkability) and physical activity habits especially walking for transportation among older adults of low socioeconomic status.
[77]	Netherlands	Urban + Rural	Quantitative (Cross-sectional)	(213; 65 +)	To analyze the heterogeneity in older adults’ preferences for different types of social activity locations (e.g., at home, community centres, or public ‘third places’) and to investigate how these preferences relate to personal and mobility characteristics.
[78]	United Kingdom	Urban + Rural	Quantitative (Longitudinal)	(6450; 65 +)	To investigate the factors associated with weekly walking hours among older adults in the UK using the socioecological model of health.
[79]	United Kingdom	Urban + Rural	Quantitative (Longitudinal)	(371 220; 65 +)	To make great connections between the different types of neighborhoods and the use of public transport, therefore the mobility of seniors.
[80]	United States	Urban + Rural	Quantitative (Cross-sectional)	(27464; 65 +)	To examine the association between the use of alternative transportation (e.g., public transit, paratransit, getting rides, walking/wheelchair/scooter) and participation in diverse social activities among older adults aged 65 and above.
[81]	United States	Urban	Quantitative	(1221; 50 +) 64.0% were ≥ 60 years old	To explore travel behavior among older adults and identify factors that support sustainable mobility patterns, particularly in a mid-sized, auto-dependent city.
[82]	United States	Urban	Quantitative (Cross-sectional)	(455; 65–95 (73.0))	To explore places used for different social interactions that older adults engage in, particularly intergenerational interactions. To examine neighborhood environmental features linked to intergenerational interactions among older adults. To compare similarities and differences in neighborhood environmental factors associated with intergenerational interactions versus walking (for transportation or recreation).
[83]	Italy	Urban	Qualitative	(15; 60–82)	To examine how tourism impacts the everyday walking mobility and lived experiences of older residents in the historical center of Venice, a city that heavily relies on walking as a mode of transportation and tourism.
[84]	United Kingdom	Urban	Qualitative	(16; 60–87; (72.0))	To engage older adults and stakeholders to (i) identify key urban barriers and facilitators to active and healthy ageing in local urban areas of Birmingham, UK; and (ii) to build on CSS to facilitate collaboration and knowledge production to form the foundations of a network that can further purpose collective policy recommendations to promote an age-friendly society.
[85]	United Kingdom	Urban + Rural	Qualitative	(28; 65 +)	To compare determinants of outdoor trips between rural and urban-living people aged 65 and older living in England.
[86]	United Kingdom	Urban	Mixed	(173; 65 +)	To examine inequalities in perceived built environment attributes (safety, pedestrian infrastructure, and aesthetics) between high- and low-deprivation neighborhoods.
[87]	Canada	Urban + Rural	Quantitative (Cross-sectional)	(1198; 67–82; (73.7))	To compare the social participation of older adults living in metropolitan, urban, and rural areas, and identified associated environmental factors.
[88]	Germany	Urban + Rural	Mixed	(78; 65–92; (74.0))	To explore how community and neighborhood structures affect participation and health in older adults.