ACCEPTABILITY OF BUILT ENVIRONMENT INTERVENTIONS AIMED AT PROMOTING A HEALTHY DIET AND PHYSICAL ACTIVITY IN URBAN NEIGHBOURHOODS OF SASKATCHEWAN, CANADA
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Background: Physical activity and diet play a critical role in the primary and secondary prevention of several chronic diseases. In Saskatchewan, 35% of adults are reported to be obese, which is partly attributable to physical inactivity and an unhealthy diet. In addition, individuals living in urban areas are faced with an increased risk of an unhealthy lifestyle due to the structure of the built environment (BE). Regardless, attempts to transform BE have met with mixed results. An essential contributor to the heterogeneity found in the success of the BE interventions is ‘public acceptability’. However, current knowledge about the acceptability of diverse BE interventions is limited. Additionally, information on how individual and neighbourhood-level factors influence acceptability is lacking. Purpose: The purpose of this study was to estimate the current level of public acceptability of diverse built environment interventions varying in intrusiveness that support healthy eating and physical activity in Saskatoon and Regina and to identify individual and neighbourhood-level factors associated with the level of acceptability of diverse interventions. Method: This study used a subset of data from “THEPA” - Targeting Healthy Eating & Physical Activity: Citizens' perspectives, with linkage to respondents’ neighbourhood-level factors using data from the Canadian Urban Environmental Health Research Consortium (CANUE). A sample of 2133 respondents was analysed using multi-level logistic regression. Missing observations were treated by multiple imputation procedure. Outcome variables were ‘agreement’ to implement 12 and 26 BE interventions related to food and physical activity. Independent variables were individual and neighbourhood-level factors. Interventions were ordered according to the level of intrusiveness as per Nuffield’s intervention ladder. iii Results: Overall, individuals were more agreeable to implementing the least intrusive interventions in both the food and physical activity domain; even so, the public support differed by the type of intervention. In addition, the likelihood of support across different levels of the intervention varied by gender, immigration status, Indigenous status, employment, education, and neighbourhood ethnic concentration. Notably, women showed a higher likelihood of support for all levels of interventions. However, no strong relationship between neighbourhood-level attributes and acceptability was detected. Conclusion: Individual factors strongly influence public acceptability, and the degree of support varies for different levels of intrusion. This study provides previously lacking evidence on the acceptability of diverse BE interventions, the influence of intervention intrusion, and individual and neighbourhood attributes on acceptability. Further investigation, including the individuals’ lived experiences, is needed for better understanding of the variations observed.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,003 | 0,009 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,003 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,002 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,002 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».