Cycling in older adults: a scoping review
高齢者におけるサイクリング:スコーピングレビュー (AI 翻訳)
Mohammadhossein Kardan, Taiyeba Akter, Mehvish Iqbal, Antonina Tcymbal, Sven Messing, Peter Gelius, Karim Abu‐Omar
🤖 gxceed AI 要約
日本語
高齢者のサイクリングに関する123件の研究をレビューし、交通安全、健康効果、環境要因などの7テーマに分類。研究の多くは観察研究で、米国、オランダ、日本の研究者が多い。交通安全が主要な焦点であり、プロモーションや技術応用の研究が不足している。
English
This scoping review synthesizes 123 studies on cycling in older adults, identifying seven themes including traffic safety, health benefits, and environmental factors. Most studies are observational, with significant contributions from US, Netherlands, and Japan. Gaps exist in promotion, technology, and barriers. Cycling offers planetary health benefits, relevant to climate change mitigation.
Unofficial AI-generated summary based on the public title and abstract. Not an official translation.
📝 gxceed 編集解説 — Why this matters
日本のGX文脈において
日本では高齢化が進み、健康増進と脱炭素交通の両立が課題。本レビューは高齢者のサイクリング促進が環境政策と連動する可能性を示唆するが、具体的なGX施策への示唆は限定的。
In the global GX context
Globally, promoting active transport like cycling aligns with climate goals. This review highlights research gaps and the need for interventions to increase cycling among older adults, contributing to sustainable mobility and public health.
👥 読者別の含意
🔬研究者:Identifies research gaps in cycling promotion and technology for older adults, useful for future studies linking health and environmental outcomes.
🏢実務担当者:Provides evidence for designing cycling programs for older adults, potentially supporting corporate wellness and sustainability initiatives.
🏛政策担当者:Informs urban planning and public health policies that encourage cycling among older populations, contributing to climate targets.
📄 Abstract(原文)
Introduction: Regular physical activity provides many health benefits to older adults. As a well-known form of physical activity, cycling can be an appropriate means for older people to meet WHO recommendations and to improve their health. In addition, cycling can help to protect the environment and reduce greenhouse gas emissions. The primary aim of this scoping review is to identify the currently available scientific evidence and gaps of research in this field. Methods: A systematic search in seven databases resulted in 7,192 studies. After the exclusion of duplicates, studies were screened by two independent reviewers in a two-stage process. Based on previously defined inclusion criteria, 123 studies were included. Data extraction was based on a descriptive analytical method, and seven categories for the main topics of studies were developed. Data were extracted by three reviewers to analyze different characteristics of included articles such as age range, study design, data type, gender, type of bicycle, and country of origin. Results: The included studies covered the following topics: (1) traffic safety, (2) cycling as physical activity or for transport, (3) health benefits, (4) environmental factors, (5) facilitators and barriers, (6) application of technology and (7) promotion of cycling. Results show that the majority of studies were performed in both younger (60-79 years) and older (80+ years) adults. Most studies had an observational study design, used conventional bicycles, and were based on quantitative methods. Researchers from the United States, Netherlands, and Japan published the highest number of studies related to cycling. Discussion: Traffic safety was the most prevalent focus of the included studies. Gaps were identified with regard to studies focusing on the promotion of cycling, application of technology, as well as facilitators and barriers of cycling. While research on traffic safety should continue to be a high priority for public health, potentially more research should focus on how to get older people to bicycle more. This is warranted by the proven individual and planetary health benefits of cycling and the urgency of combating climate change.
🔗 Provenance — このレコードを発見したソース
- openalex https://doi.org/10.3389/fspor.2023.1157503first seen 2026-08-02 16:48:45
🔔 こうした論文の新着を逃したくない方は キーワードアラート に登録(無料・3キーワードまで)。
gxceed は公開メタデータに基づく研究支援データセットです。要約・翻訳・解説は AI 支援で生成されています。 最終的な解釈・検証は利用者が原典資料に基づいて行うことを前提とします。