Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

What Do Canadian Seniors Say Supports Their Quality of Life?

Findings from a National Participatory Research Study

  • Published:
Canadian Journal of Public Health Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background: A national project investigated seniors’ perceptions of the influences upon their quality of life. The seven participating cities were Montreal, Quebec City, Ottawa, Toronto, Regina, Vancouver and Whitehorse. The project focussed on policy decisions affecting the quality of life of seniors. It was a participatory study in which seniors controlled the direction and shape of the project in each city.

Methods: Focus groups and individual interviews with seniors and stakeholders. Data analysis used qualitative methods to see the world through the eyes of participants. Each project was committed to hearing the voices of seniors and their views on which issues were affecting the quality of their lives.

Results: Across the seven cities, seniors highlighted access to information, health care, housing, income security, safety and security, social contacts and networks, and transportation as key issues that affect the quality of life of seniors in Canada.

Conclusions: The findings affirm the value of participatory activities that involve seniors working with other sectors as a productive policy-informing approach. The Seniors’ Quality of Life projects demonstrate the conceptual power of the determinants of health perspective to understand seniors’ quality of life issues. While seniors considered health care to be a continuing concern, they also recognized socio-economic issues as significantly affecting the quality of their lives.

Résumé

Contexte: Un projet national s’est penché sur la perception par les aînés des facteurs qui influencent leur qualité de vie. Les sept villes participantes étaient Montréal, Québec, Ottawa, Toronto, Regina, Vancouver et Whitehorse. Le projet a porté sur les politiques qui ont un effet sur la qualité de vie des aînés. Il s’agissait d’une étude participative où des aînés ont contrôlé l’orientation et la forme du projet dans chaque ville.

Méthode: Nous avons organisé des discussions de groupe et des entretiens individuels avec des aînés et des professionnels. Pour l’analyse des données, nous avons adopté une méthode qualitative afin de voir le monde avec les yeux des participants. Chaque projet s’était engagé à écouter les aînés et leurs points de vue sur les enjeux qui ont un effet sur leur qualité de vie.

Résultats: Dans les sept villes, les aînés ont souligné l’accès à l’information, les soins de santé, le logement, la sécurité du revenu, la sécurité et la protection, les contacts et réseaux sociaux, ainsi que les transports comme étant les principaux enjeux touchant leur qualité de vie au Canada.

Conclusions: Ces constatations soulignent la valeur, en tant que démarche productive sous-tendant les politiques, des activités participatives où des aînés collaborent avec d’autres secteurs. Les projets „ Qualité de vie des aînés ” font la preuve de la puissance conceptuelle d’une perspective axée sur les déterminants de la santé pour comprendre les enjeux liés à la qualité de vie des aînés. Les soins de santé sont bien sûr une préoccupation constante pour les aînés, mais ces derniers reconnaissent aussi que les facteurs socio-économiques exercent une influence considérable sur leur qualité de vie.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Health Canada. Dare to Age Well! Ottawa, Ontario: Division of Aging and Seniors, 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Lilley S. Policies for Aging Population: An International Perspective. Halifax, NS: Population and Public Health Branch, Atlantic Region, Health Canada, 2002 November.

    Google Scholar 

  3. National Forum on Health. Building on the Legacy: Volume 2, Adults and Seniors. Ottawa, ON: National Forum on Health, 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Bryant T, Raphael D, Brown I, Wheeler J, Herman R, Houston J, et al. Opening up the public policy analysis process to the public: Participatory policy research and Canadian seniors’ quality of life. Can Rev Soc Pol 2001;48:35–67.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Lilley S, Campbell JM. Shifting Sands: The Changing Shape of Atlantic Canada. 1999. A report on economic and demographic trends in Atlantic Canada and their impacts on seniors. Population Public Health Branch Atlantic Region (PPHB Atlantic), Health Canada, 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Ulysse P-J, Lesemann F. Population aging: An overview of the past thirty years: Review of the literature. Health Canada, Health Promotion and Programs Branch, Population Health Directorate, Division of Aging and Seniors, 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Quality of Life Research Unit Website. The Seniors Quality of Life Project. Toronto, ON: Centre for Health Promotion, 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Bryant T, Raphael D, Brown I, Cogan T, Dallaire C, Laforest S, et al. A Nation for All Ages? A Participatory Study of Canadian Seniors’ Quality of Life in Seven Municipalities. Toronto, ON: York University Centre for Health Studies, 2002. On-line at http://www.yorku.ca/ychs/seniorsfinalreport.pdf.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Health Canada. The Population Health Template: Key Elements and Actions That Define a Population Health Approach. Strategic Policy Directorate, Population and Public Health Branch, Health Canada, 2001. On-line at http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/hppb/phdd/pdf/discussion_paper.pdf.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Wilkinson R, Marmot M. Social Determinants of Health: The Solid Facts, 2nd edition. Copenhagan, Denmark: World Health Organization (WHO), Europe Office, 2003. On-line at http://www.who.dk/document/e81384.pdf.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Marmot M, Wilkinson R. Social Determinants of Health. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Minkler M, Wallerstein N, Hall B. Community Based Participatory Research for Health. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Lindstrom B. Quality of life: A model for evaluating health for all. Soz Praventivmed 1992;37:301–6.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Raphael D, Brown I, Renwick R, Rootman I. Quality of life: What are the implications for health promotion? Am J Health Behav 1997;21(2):118–28.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Canadian Policy Research Networks. Asking Citizens What Matters for Quality of Life in Canada: A Rural Lens. Ottawa, ON: Canadian Policy Research Networks (CPRN), 2001 November. On-line at http://www.cprn.com/en/theme-docs.cfm?theme=4.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Navarro V, Shi L. The political context of social inequalities and health. In: Navarro V (Ed.), The Political Economy of Social Inequalities: Consequences for Health and Quality of Life. Amityville, NY: Baywood, 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Federation of Canadian Municipalities. Quality of Life Reporting System: Quality of Life in Canadian Communities: Federation of Canadian Municipalities (FCM), 1999. On-line at http://www.fcm.ca/english/communications/qualitylife.htm.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Michalski JH. Asking Citizens What Matters for Quality of Life in Canada: Results of CPRN’s Public Dialogue Process. Ottawa, ON: Canadian Policy Research Networks (CPRN), 2001. Online at http://www.cprn.com/en/doc.cfm?doc=48.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Health Canada. Taking Action on Population Health: A Position Paper for Health Promotion and Programs Branch Staff. Ottawa, ON: Health Canada, 1998. On-line at http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/hppb/phdd/pdf/tad_e.pdf.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Lincoln YS, Guba EG. Naturalistic Inquiry. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications, 1985.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  21. Daniels N. Am I My Parents’ Keeper? An Essay on Justice Between the Young and the Old. New York: Oxford University Press, 1988.

    Google Scholar 

  22. McElroy K, Bibeau D, Steckler A, Glanz K. An ecological perspective on health promotion programs. Health Educ Q 1988;15(4):351–77.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Richard LD, Laforest S, Dufresne F, Sapinski JP. The quality of life of older adults living in an urban environment: Professional and lay perspectives. Article submitted for publication.

  24. Raphael D, Phillips S, Renwick R, Sehdev H. Government policies as a threat to health: Findings from two Toronto community quality of life studies. Can J Public Health 2000;91(3):181–85.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Raphael D. When social policy is health policy: Why increasing poverty and low income threatens Canadians’ health and health care system. Can Rev Soc Pol 2003;(51):9–28.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Bryant T. Role of knowledge in public health and health promotion policy change. Health Prom Int 2002;17(1):89–98.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Armstrong P, Amaratunga C, Bernier J, Grant K, Pederson A, Wilson K. Exposing Privatization: Women and Health Care Reform in Canada. Toronto, ON: Garamond, 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Bryant T. The current state of housing as a social determinant of health. Policy Options 2003;March:52–56.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Raphael D (Ed). Social Determinants of Health: Canadian Perspectives. Toronto, ON: Canadian Scholars Press, 2004.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Lessard R. Prevent, Cure, Care - Challenges of an Ageing Society. 1999 Annual Report on the Health of the Montreal Population. Montreal: Direction de la santé publique de Montréal-Centre, 1999. On-line at http://www.santepubmtl.qc.ca/Publication/rapportannuel/1999/intro1999eng.pdf.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. York University Centre for Health Studies, 4700 Keele Street, 214 York Lanes, Toronto, ON, M3J 1P3, Canada

    Toba Bryant PhD & Dennis Raphael PhD

  2. University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada

    Ivan Brown PhD

  3. Vancouver, BC, Canada

    Tara Cogan

  4. Université Laval, Québec, QC, Canada

    Clemence Dallaire PhD

  5. Université de Montréal, Montréal, QC, Canada

    Sophie Laforest PhD & Lucie Richard PhD

  6. University of Victoria, Victoria, BC, Canada

    Patrick McGowan PhD

  7. Loraine Thompson Information Services Limited, Regina, SK, Canada

    Loraine Thompson MEd

  8. Whitehorse, YT, Canada

    Joyce Young

Authors
  1. Toba Bryant PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ivan Brown PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Tara Cogan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Clemence Dallaire PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Sophie Laforest PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Patrick McGowan PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Dennis Raphael PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Lucie Richard PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Loraine Thompson MEd
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. Joyce Young
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Toba Bryant PhD.

Additional information

Disclaimer: The views expressed in this report are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of Health Canada.

Source of support in the form of grant: Population Health Fund, Health Canada

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Bryant, T., Brown, I., Cogan, T. et al. What Do Canadian Seniors Say Supports Their Quality of Life?. Can J Public Health 95, 299–303 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03405136

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03405136

Search

Navigation