Social engagement and successful aging
Open accessIntegrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Variability in the ways activity and 'engagement in life' are operationalised and measured makes interpretation of the literature problematic.
“Variability in the ways activity and 'engagement in life ' are operationalised and measured makes interpretation of the literature problematic (Mendes de Leon 2005; Parslow et al. 2006 ;Ritchey, Ritchey and Diaz 2001).”
From A critical review of the literature on social and leisure activity and wellbeing in later life (2011) · cites this paper as Mendes de Leon 2005
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 10 · Cited by 98
- Authors
- Mendes de Leon, C. F.
- Venue
- European Journal of Ageing
- Published
- 2005-03
- Volume
- 2
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 64-66
- ISSN
- 1613-9372 (ISSN-L)
- 1613-9380
- PMC
- PMC5547667
- OpenAlex
- W2003519705
- Cited by
- 98
- References
- 10
- Citations by year
- 2026: 4 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 9 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 7 · 2012: 4
- FWCI
- 1.73
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Licence
- www.springer.com/tdm (tdm)
- Locations
- European Journal of Ageing (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Neuropsychology and Physiological Psychology › Aging and Gerontology Research
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Aging, Health, and Disability
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Aging, Elder Care, and Social Issues
- Keywords
- social engagement, successful aging, older adults, social participation (health and rehabilitation)
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
