MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4283207095 · doi:10.1186/s12889-022-13611-0

Cross-sectional and longitudinal associations between the built environment and walking: effect modification by socioeconomic status

2022· article· en· W4283207095 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Chelsea D. Christie, Christine M. Friedenreich, Jennifer E. Vena, Liam Turley, Gavin R. McCormack

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Public Health · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicUrban Transport and Accessibility
Canadian institutionsAlberta Health ServicesAlberta Cancer FoundationUniversity of Calgary
FundersHealth CanadaCenters for Disease Control and PreventionCumming School of Medicine, University of CalgaryKillam TrustsCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchAlberta Cancer FoundationPartenariat Canadien Contre Le CancerAlberta Health Services
KeywordsBiostatisticsSocioeconomic statusMedicineEffect modificationCross-sectional studyEnvironmental healthPublic healthEpidemiologyGerontologyBuilt environmentPopulationInternal medicineNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Although socioeconomic status (SES) has been shown to modify associations between the neighborhood built environment and physical activity, contradictory results exist. Objectives of this cross-sectional and longitudinal analysis were to: 1) examine whether overall neighborhood walkability and specific built characteristics were associated with walking among adults at a single point in time and after they relocate neighborhoods, and 2) test for effect modification of these associations by SES. METHODS: We linked longitudinal data from 703 adults who relocated urban neighborhoods between two waves of Alberta's Tomorrow Project (2008-2015) to neighborhood built environment data. We created a walkability index from measures of population counts, street connectivity, and destination diversity within 400 m of participants' homes. In cross-sectional analyses, we used generalized linear models to estimate associations between built characteristics and minutes walked per week at baseline. For the longitudinal analyses, we used fixed-effects linear regression models to estimate associations between changes in built characteristics and minutes walked per week. We also assessed if indicators of SES (individual education or household income) modified both sets of associations. RESULTS: Most cross-sectional and longitudinal associations were small and statistically non-significant. Neighborhood population count (b = 0.03, 95% CI: 0.01, 0.07) and street connectivity (b = - 1.75, 95% CI: - 3.26, - 0.24) were cross-sectionally associated with walking duration among the overall sample. None of the longitudinal associations were statistically significant among the overall sample. There was limited evidence of effect modification by SES, however, we found negative cross-sectional associations between street connectivity and walking among adults with lower education and income, and a positive association between percent change in walkability and change in walking among lower educated adults. CONCLUSIONS: Despite population count and street connectivity being associated with walking at baseline, changes in these built environment variables were not associated with changes in walking following residential relocation. Our findings also provide evidence, albeit weak, that changes in neighborhood walkability, resulting from residential relocation, might more strongly affect walking among low SES adults. Further longitudinal research is needed to examine built environment characteristics with walking for different purposes and to test for inequitable socioeconomic impacts.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.042
Threshold uncertainty score0.084

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.070
GPT teacher head0.359
Teacher spread0.289 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations12
Published2022
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC Public HealthSame topicUrban Transport and AccessibilityFrench-language works237,207