Age-friendly buses? A comparison of reported barriers and facilitators to bus use for younger and older adults

Australasian Journal on Ageing

Volumn 29, Issue 1, 2010, Pages 33-38

  Broome, Kieran ^a   Nalder, Emily ^a   Worrall, Linda ^a   Boldy, Duncan ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF QUEENSLAND   (Australia)

^b CURTIN UNIVERSITY   (Australia)

Author keywords

Age friendly; Aged; Buses; Focus groups; Useability

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; CAR DRIVING; COMPARATIVE STUDY; CONSTRUCTION WORK AND ARCHITECTURAL PHENOMENA; FEMALE; HUMAN; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; MOTOR VEHICLE; PSYCHOLOGICAL ASPECT; SOCIAL BEHAVIOR; SOCIAL ENVIRONMENT;

ADULT; ARCHITECTURAL ACCESSIBILITY; AUTOMOBILE DRIVING; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; MOTOR VEHICLES; SOCIAL BEHAVIOR; SOCIAL ENVIRONMENT;

EID: 77953766344     PISSN: 14406381     EISSN: 17416612     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1741-6612.2009.00382.x     Document Type: Article

References (22)

1. Coughlin J. Transportation and Older Persons: Perceptions and Preferences 2001, Washington, DC, AARP Public Policy Institute
2. Marottoli RA, de Leon CFM, Glass TA, Williams CS, Cooney LM, Berkman LF. Consequences of driving cessation: Decreased out-of-home activity levels. The Journals of Gerontology. Series B, Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences 2000, 55B:S334-S340.
3. National Strategy for an Ageing Australia. http://www.health.gov.au/internet/main/publishing.nsf/Content/health-budget2000-fact-acfact1.htm, Australian Government, Department of Health and Ageing, Cited 26 January 2007.] Available from URL:
4. Metz D. Transport policy for an ageing population. Transport Reviews 2003, 23:375-386.
5. Broome K, McKenna K, Fleming J, Worrall L. Bus use & older people: A literature review applying the person-environment-occupation model in macro practice. Scandinavian Journal of Occupational Therapy 2009, 16(1):3-12.
6. O'Neill D. Safe mobility for older people. Reviews in Clinical Gerontology 2000, 10:181-191.
7. Older American Attitudes towards Mobility and Transportation. http://www.apta.com/media/releases/documents/051206harris_interactive.pdf, Harris Interactive, Cited 11 August 2006.] Available from URL:
8. Environmental Issues: People's Views and Practices. http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/mf/4602.0/, Australian Bureau of Statistics, Cited 15 July 2007.] Available from URL:
9. Bickenbach J, Chatterjl S, Bradley E, Üstün T. Models of disablement, universalism and the International Classification of Impairments, Disabilities and Handicaps. Social Science & Medicine 1999, 48:1173-1187.
10. Vrkljan B. Reflections on. . dispelling the disability stereotype: Embracing a universalistic perspective of disablement. Canadian Journal of Occupational Therapy 2005, 72:57-59.
11. Iwarsson S, Ståhl A. Accessibility, usability and universal design - positioning and definition of concepts describing person-environment relationships. Disability and Rehabilitation 2003, 25(2):57-66.
12. Williams D. Disability Standards for Accessible Public Transport 2002 2002, Canberra, Australian Government
13. Hodge M. Consultation with Australians with disabilities as a means of evaluating accessible public transport: Transed 2007 Comotred Conference. 18-22 June 2007; Montréal
14. Disability, Ageing and Carers 2003: A Summary of Findings. http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/mf/4430.0, Australian Bureau of Statistics, Cited 15 July 2007.] Available from URL:
15. Global Age-Friendly Cities: A Guide. http://www.who.int/ageing/publications/Global_age_friendly_cities_Guide_English.pdf, World Health Organization, Cited 10 September 2007.] Available from URL:
16. Age friendly built environments - background paper the broad social and economic context: Community and Disability Services Ministers' Conference. Australian Government Department of Health and Ageing, 28 July 2004; Canberra
17. Mann E, Abraham C. The role of affect in UK commuters' travel mode choices: An interpretative phenomenological analysis. British Journal of Psychology 2006, 97:155-176.
18. Stradling S. Transport user needs and marketing public transport. Municipal Engineer 2002, 151(1):23-28.
19. Murray A. Strategic analysis of public transport coverage. Socio-economic Planning Sciences 2001, 35:175-188.
20. de Ruyter K. Focus versus nominal group interviews: A comparative analysis. Marketing Intelligence & Planning 1996, 14(6):44-50.
21. McMurray AR. Three decision-making aids brainstorming, nominal group and Delphi techniques. Journal of Nursing Staff Development: JNSD 1994, 10(2):62-65.
22. Graneheim UH, Lundman B. Qualitative content analysis in nursing research: Concepts, procedures and measures to achieve trustworthiness. Nurse Education Today 2004, 24:105-112.