How Do Awareness, Perceptions, and Expectations of an Urban Greenway Influence Residents’ Visits and Recreational Physical Activity? Evidence From the Connswater Community Greenway, Belfast, Northern Ireland
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The development of an urban greenway as part of a major regeneration project may encourage usage and recreational physical activity (PA). However, how the awareness and perceptions of such a project influence the usage of the greenway and recreational PA after regeneration remains unclear. This study focused on these relationships in the context of a major urban regeneration project, the Connswater Community Greenway (CCG) in Belfast, Northern Ireland. Data were collected from residents living near the CCG at 6 months postimplementation (2016/2017). Awareness, perceptions, and expectations of the CCG were assessed using several self-reported questions. Respondents were split into intervention and control groups based on a 1-mile threshold distance to the CCG from their home address (intervention group ≤1 mile; control group >1 mile). Self-reported CCG usage included both frequency and duration of visits. Recreational PA was evaluated with the Global Physical Activity Questionnaire and PA stages of change measure. We used multilevel linear and logistic regressions to examine awareness, perceptions, and expectations of the CCG on visitation and recreational PA. Results showed that favorable awareness, perceptions, and expectations were positively associated with CCG visits and recreational PA. Frequent and longer durations of CCG visits were also important for encouraging recreational PA. These findings provide evidence that it is important to include awareness-raising programs and education regarding the urban greenway development for health benefits.
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 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
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".