Characteristics of geographic environments that support the health and wellbeing of young people with disability: A scoping review

Abstract

PURPOSE: We aimed to: 1) identify key characteristics of geographic environments relating to the health and wellbeing of young people with disability that have been published in the literature, and 2) determine the coverage of evidence examining these characteristics and current gaps in knowledge of the ways geographic environments support health and wellbeing outcomes for young people with disability. METHODS: This scoping review followed Arksey and O'Malley's methodological framework and established reporting guidelines (PRISMA-ScR Checklist). We searched the following databases: Web of Science (Core Collection), PubMed (Medline), Scopus, Proquest Central. RESULTS: We identified 35 studies meeting inclusion criteria, which were mostly from high-income, English-speaking countries. Studies were grouped into ten major themes, which broadly align with place-based social determinants of health (e.g., access to transport, neighbourhood built environments). The largest body of evidence coalesced around neighbourhood social cohesion and related concepts. Notable gaps included a lack of evidence from the Global South, and limited investigation of local employment availability, access to healthcare, leisure and recreation, neighbourhood safety, and transitions into independent living. CONCLUSIONS: This scoping review characterised the existing evidence around the key characteristics of geographic environments that support (or hinder) the health and wellbeing of young people with disability, and identified several important gaps and opportunities for future research. This includes developing a better understanding of the place-based experiences, geographic scales, and environmental exposures that are most relevant for young people with disability, including through participatory methods (e.g., participatory mapping).

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 5 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.