The first tier of Boston suburbs was gobbled up by the city 100 years ago. What you see in places like Brighton and Roxbury/Medical is the long arm of Harvard, Inc. (to name one force reversing decline), and with the investment in tech-research-educational-medical facilities, a robust improvement since the low point of the 70s. Davis Square had thoroughly deteriorated till the Red Line came through and HCHP came in. When they took down the El in Charlestown, a renaissance took place. Look for good things across the river in Watertown with the redevelopment of the Arsenal. This has not happened in Dorchester...yet. But there just aren't any more Southies and South Ends to become gentrified, and professionals have to live somewhere. It seems like immigrants who don't want to join in are going to get squeezed out.
The suburbs I think of in Boston that are covered by the report are older cities like Chelsea, Milton, Somerville, and Quincy and suburbs like Medford, Braintree, Waltham, Malden, Framingham and Revere.
Some of them have ritzy areas, some of them are quite tidy, but they're all facing either serious aging issues (people AND housing), immigration driving changes, and economic shifts. The report also didn't rule out gentrification in some areas, but that causes its own issues. Framingham is technically a suburb, but socially it has more in common with Boston, and much more in common with Somerville and Medford, than it does with a real recent suburb like Franklin or Norfolk.