Air Pollution-Driven Parental Restrictions: Associations with Children’s Active School Transport in Urban and Rural India
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Active school transportation (AST), including walking or cycling to school, is common among children and youth in India. However, rising air pollution and public health advisories may encourage parents to restrict outdoor activities. The role of parental restrictions on children’s and youths’ participation in AST remains largely unexplored. This study examines how parental restrictions on outdoor activity influence children’s and youths’ engagement in AST. We surveyed children and youth aged 5 to 17 from 41 schools across 28 urban and rural locations in five Indian states, collecting data on AST, parental restrictions, perceptions of air pollution, sociodemographic factors, and school distance. Data were analyzed using multiple logistic regression models, adjusted and unadjusted for children’s and youths’ perceptions of air pollution, segregated by age, gender, and location. Reported parental restrictions due to air pollution were associated with lower odds of engaging in AST overall (OR = 0.625, 95% CI = 0.400–0.971), for ages 5–12 (OR = 0.460, 95% CI = 0.208–0.985, and in urban areas (OR = 0.433, 95% CI = 0.198–0.881). Adjusting for children’s and youths’ air pollution perceptions, these associations persisted in overall and urban analyses. Living over 2 kilometres from school also lowered odds of AST participation (p < 0.05 across all models). The interplay between AST, air pollution, and parental restrictions is self-reinforcing: air pollution can trigger parents to restrict child and youth mobility and reduce AST and, in turn, lower AST may contribute to worsening air quality because of increased motorized transport. Integrated policies are required to simultaneously mitigate pollution and enhance active transportation infrastructure.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".