No Cover Image

Journal article 718 views 90 downloads

The impact of residential immobility and population turnover on the support networks of older people living in rural areas: Evidence from CFAS Wales

Vanessa Burholt Orcid Logo, Alexandra Vanta Sardani

Population, Space and Place, Volume: 24, Start page: e2132

Swansea University Author: Vanessa Burholt Orcid Logo

  • OFFPRINTTheimpactofresidentialimmobilityonthesupportnetworksofolderpeopleBurholt_et_al-2017-Population,_Space_and_Place.pdf

    PDF | Version of Record

    Released under the terms of a Creative Commons Attribution License (CC-BY).

    Download (204.36KB)

Check full text

DOI (Published version): 10.1002/psp.2132

Abstract

This article addresses two questions: Are ‘stayers’ - defined as older people who were born in an area and lived there for 25 years or more prior to interview – more likely to have locally integrated or family dependent networks than other types of networks in the 21st Century? Does population turno...

Full description

Published in: Population, Space and Place
ISSN: 15448444
Published: Wiley 2018
Online Access: Check full text

URI: https://cronfa.swan.ac.uk/Record/cronfa38077
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
first_indexed 2018-01-12T20:10:09Z
last_indexed 2020-10-16T02:50:47Z
id cronfa38077
recordtype SURis
fullrecord <?xml version="1.0"?><rfc1807><datestamp>2020-10-15T11:04:27.5582181</datestamp><bib-version>v2</bib-version><id>38077</id><entry>2018-01-12</entry><title>The impact of residential immobility and population turnover on the support networks of older people living in rural areas: Evidence from CFAS Wales</title><swanseaauthors><author><sid>cf7fe9863906cd54df5b0a99904d535e</sid><ORCID>0000-0002-6789-127X</ORCID><firstname>Vanessa</firstname><surname>Burholt</surname><name>Vanessa Burholt</name><active>true</active><ethesisStudent>false</ethesisStudent></author></swanseaauthors><date>2018-01-12</date><deptcode>PHAC</deptcode><abstract>This article addresses two questions: Are &#x2018;stayers&#x2019; - defined as older people who were born in an area and lived there for 25 years or more prior to interview &#x2013; more likely to have locally integrated or family dependent networks than other types of networks in the 21st Century? Does population turnover influence the support networks of older people more strongly than being a &#x2018;stayer&#x2019;? A sample of 1,870 participants living in rural areas is drawn from cross-sectional (Wave 1) data (version 2) from The Cognitive Function and Ageing Study (CFAS Wales). Five multinomial logistic regression models are used to establish how demographic covariates, cumulative population turnover, inflow, outflow and &#x2018;stayer&#x2019; influence membership of Family Dependent (FD), Locally Integrated (LI), Local-Self Contained (LSC), Wider Community Focused (WCF) and Private Restricted (PR) support networks. The results reveal significant differences in the distribution of network types between stayers and non-stayers. Stayers were more likely to have LI or FD networks and were less likely to have WCF or PR networks than non-stayers. Gender, marital status, education, disability, childlessness, area deprivation, and cumulative population turnover, inflow and outflow (by age group) also influence membership of different networks. The research has implications for planning of formal services in rural places characterised by &#x2018;ageing in place&#x2019; or as &#x2018;ageing places&#x2019; and comprising socially engaged and socially marginalized networks. In particular, providers of social care should take into account the different types of support that may be required to bolster socially marginalized support networks.</abstract><type>Journal Article</type><journal>Population, Space and Place</journal><volume>24</volume><paginationStart>e2132</paginationStart><publisher>Wiley</publisher><issnPrint>15448444</issnPrint><keywords>ageing in place; ageing places; support networks; informal carers; older people; rural</keywords><publishedDay>16</publishedDay><publishedMonth>5</publishedMonth><publishedYear>2018</publishedYear><publishedDate>2018-05-16</publishedDate><doi>10.1002/psp.2132</doi><url>http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/psp.2132/epdf</url><notes/><college>COLLEGE NANME</college><department>Public Health</department><CollegeCode>COLLEGE CODE</CollegeCode><DepartmentCode>PHAC</DepartmentCode><institution>Swansea University</institution><degreesponsorsfunders>ESRC; HEFCW</degreesponsorsfunders><apcterm/><lastEdited>2020-10-15T11:04:27.5582181</lastEdited><Created>2018-01-12T15:53:03.7795975</Created><path><level id="1">Faculty of Medicine, Health and Life Sciences</level><level id="2">The Centre for Innovative Ageing</level></path><authors><author><firstname>Vanessa</firstname><surname>Burholt</surname><orcid>0000-0002-6789-127X</orcid><order>1</order></author><author><firstname>Alexandra Vanta</firstname><surname>Sardani</surname><order>2</order></author></authors><documents><document><filename>0038077-12012018155440.pdf</filename><originalFilename>OFFPRINTTheimpactofresidentialimmobilityonthesupportnetworksofolderpeopleBurholt_et_al-2017-Population,_Space_and_Place.pdf</originalFilename><uploaded>2018-01-12T15:54:40.0970000</uploaded><type>Output</type><contentLength>197370</contentLength><contentType>application/pdf</contentType><version>Version of Record</version><cronfaStatus>true</cronfaStatus><embargoDate>2018-01-12T00:00:00.0000000</embargoDate><documentNotes>Released under the terms of a Creative Commons Attribution License (CC-BY).</documentNotes><copyrightCorrect>true</copyrightCorrect><language>eng</language></document></documents><OutputDurs/></rfc1807>
spelling 2020-10-15T11:04:27.5582181 v2 38077 2018-01-12 The impact of residential immobility and population turnover on the support networks of older people living in rural areas: Evidence from CFAS Wales cf7fe9863906cd54df5b0a99904d535e 0000-0002-6789-127X Vanessa Burholt Vanessa Burholt true false 2018-01-12 PHAC This article addresses two questions: Are ‘stayers’ - defined as older people who were born in an area and lived there for 25 years or more prior to interview – more likely to have locally integrated or family dependent networks than other types of networks in the 21st Century? Does population turnover influence the support networks of older people more strongly than being a ‘stayer’? A sample of 1,870 participants living in rural areas is drawn from cross-sectional (Wave 1) data (version 2) from The Cognitive Function and Ageing Study (CFAS Wales). Five multinomial logistic regression models are used to establish how demographic covariates, cumulative population turnover, inflow, outflow and ‘stayer’ influence membership of Family Dependent (FD), Locally Integrated (LI), Local-Self Contained (LSC), Wider Community Focused (WCF) and Private Restricted (PR) support networks. The results reveal significant differences in the distribution of network types between stayers and non-stayers. Stayers were more likely to have LI or FD networks and were less likely to have WCF or PR networks than non-stayers. Gender, marital status, education, disability, childlessness, area deprivation, and cumulative population turnover, inflow and outflow (by age group) also influence membership of different networks. The research has implications for planning of formal services in rural places characterised by ‘ageing in place’ or as ‘ageing places’ and comprising socially engaged and socially marginalized networks. In particular, providers of social care should take into account the different types of support that may be required to bolster socially marginalized support networks. Journal Article Population, Space and Place 24 e2132 Wiley 15448444 ageing in place; ageing places; support networks; informal carers; older people; rural 16 5 2018 2018-05-16 10.1002/psp.2132 http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/psp.2132/epdf COLLEGE NANME Public Health COLLEGE CODE PHAC Swansea University ESRC; HEFCW 2020-10-15T11:04:27.5582181 2018-01-12T15:53:03.7795975 Faculty of Medicine, Health and Life Sciences The Centre for Innovative Ageing Vanessa Burholt 0000-0002-6789-127X 1 Alexandra Vanta Sardani 2 0038077-12012018155440.pdf OFFPRINTTheimpactofresidentialimmobilityonthesupportnetworksofolderpeopleBurholt_et_al-2017-Population,_Space_and_Place.pdf 2018-01-12T15:54:40.0970000 Output 197370 application/pdf Version of Record true 2018-01-12T00:00:00.0000000 Released under the terms of a Creative Commons Attribution License (CC-BY). true eng
title The impact of residential immobility and population turnover on the support networks of older people living in rural areas: Evidence from CFAS Wales
spellingShingle The impact of residential immobility and population turnover on the support networks of older people living in rural areas: Evidence from CFAS Wales
Vanessa Burholt
title_short The impact of residential immobility and population turnover on the support networks of older people living in rural areas: Evidence from CFAS Wales
title_full The impact of residential immobility and population turnover on the support networks of older people living in rural areas: Evidence from CFAS Wales
title_fullStr The impact of residential immobility and population turnover on the support networks of older people living in rural areas: Evidence from CFAS Wales
title_full_unstemmed The impact of residential immobility and population turnover on the support networks of older people living in rural areas: Evidence from CFAS Wales
title_sort The impact of residential immobility and population turnover on the support networks of older people living in rural areas: Evidence from CFAS Wales
author_id_str_mv cf7fe9863906cd54df5b0a99904d535e
author_id_fullname_str_mv cf7fe9863906cd54df5b0a99904d535e_***_Vanessa Burholt
author Vanessa Burholt
author2 Vanessa Burholt
Alexandra Vanta Sardani
format Journal article
container_title Population, Space and Place
container_volume 24
container_start_page e2132
publishDate 2018
institution Swansea University
issn 15448444
doi_str_mv 10.1002/psp.2132
publisher Wiley
college_str Faculty of Medicine, Health and Life Sciences
hierarchytype
hierarchy_top_id facultyofmedicinehealthandlifesciences
hierarchy_top_title Faculty of Medicine, Health and Life Sciences
hierarchy_parent_id facultyofmedicinehealthandlifesciences
hierarchy_parent_title Faculty of Medicine, Health and Life Sciences
department_str The Centre for Innovative Ageing{{{_:::_}}}Faculty of Medicine, Health and Life Sciences{{{_:::_}}}The Centre for Innovative Ageing
url http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/psp.2132/epdf
document_store_str 1
active_str 0
description This article addresses two questions: Are ‘stayers’ - defined as older people who were born in an area and lived there for 25 years or more prior to interview – more likely to have locally integrated or family dependent networks than other types of networks in the 21st Century? Does population turnover influence the support networks of older people more strongly than being a ‘stayer’? A sample of 1,870 participants living in rural areas is drawn from cross-sectional (Wave 1) data (version 2) from The Cognitive Function and Ageing Study (CFAS Wales). Five multinomial logistic regression models are used to establish how demographic covariates, cumulative population turnover, inflow, outflow and ‘stayer’ influence membership of Family Dependent (FD), Locally Integrated (LI), Local-Self Contained (LSC), Wider Community Focused (WCF) and Private Restricted (PR) support networks. The results reveal significant differences in the distribution of network types between stayers and non-stayers. Stayers were more likely to have LI or FD networks and were less likely to have WCF or PR networks than non-stayers. Gender, marital status, education, disability, childlessness, area deprivation, and cumulative population turnover, inflow and outflow (by age group) also influence membership of different networks. The research has implications for planning of formal services in rural places characterised by ‘ageing in place’ or as ‘ageing places’ and comprising socially engaged and socially marginalized networks. In particular, providers of social care should take into account the different types of support that may be required to bolster socially marginalized support networks.
published_date 2018-05-16T03:45:50Z
_version_ 1756145805463388160
score 10.926129