A 12-month natural experiment investigating the impacts of replacing a traditional bus service with bus rapid transit on physical activity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction Regular physical activity provides numerous health benefits. The neighbourhood built environment is important for supporting physical activity . Despite higher physical activity among public transit users, the effect of introducing Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) services on physical activity remains unclear. We undertook a natural experiment which aimed to estimate changes in transit use and physical activity before and after (12-months) a new BRT service replaced a traditional bus service. Methods Between August/September 2018 and 2019, a sample of adults (n = 196) (Calgary, Canada) completed two online questionnaires. During the 12-months between questionnaires, new BRT stops replaced existing traditional bus stops. Participants were divided into exposed (n = 80) and comparison (n = 116) groups based on a threshold network distance (800m) between their households and the nearest BRT stop. We undertook propensity score analysis to adjust for baseline differences in sociodemographic characteristics , health behaviours, walkability (Walk Score®), and transit accessibility (Transit Score®) between the exposed and comparison groups and estimated post intervention differences in neighbourhood transportation walking (NWT) and cycling (NTC), moderate-to-vigorous intensity physical activity (MVPA), and transit use and perceive relative change of physical activity during the last 12-months. Results There were no significant differences in weekly minutes of NWT or NTC between the exposed and comparison groups. Groups were also similar in the accumulation of daily sufficient MVPA and perceived relative change in physical activity after 12-months. Compared with non-users, transit users reported higher (p < .05) NTW minutes per week at baseline and follow-up in the exposed group (156.5 vs. 54.0 and 129.0 vs. 60.5, respectively) and at baseline in the comparison group (103.7 vs. 52.9). Conclusions Replacing a traditional bus service with a BRT service may have no noticeable immediate impact on physical activity levels .
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".