MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7162038898 · doi:10.82308/14295

The influence of the urban built environment on utilitarian walking and body mass index: Trip diary and longitudinal studies of Canadians

2016· dissertation· en· W7162038898 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Rania Wasfi

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicUrban Transport and Accessibility
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBuilt environmentNeighbourhood (mathematics)Urban designGeocodingWalkabilityLevel designPublic transportWork (physics)PopulationHuman factors and ergonomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There is growing interest in developing livable cities with neighbourhoods that encourage active living. The urban built environment including land use, amenities and transportation systems is increasingly expected to provide a variety of benefits including neighborhood walking-friendliness. To date, there have been few long term studies with large population samples that have assessed the relationships between walking-friendliness of places and the level of utilitarian walking (i.e., walking for a specific purpose such as to go to work or to school) in people. Most research to date has relied on cross-sectional study designs and the conclusions of many existing studies are invariably limited owing to problems of self-selection of motivated walkers into walking-friendly neighbourhoods. This dissertation addresses some of the methodological limitations in this research area by measuring utilitarian walking using geographic information system-based estimates in a cross-sectional approach, and by geocoding respondents of a population-based longitudinal survey for quasi-experimental designs to assess the role of urban built environments on utilitarian walking and body weight. My dissertation has produced three key findings: 1. Montreal residents were able to achieve the recommended 30 minutes of physical activity each working day by commuting to work using public transportation. This benefit was greatest for suburban residents who walked approximately 35 to 50 minutes per day to and from commuter train stations, the majority of whom were affluent. Transportation system characteristics had greater influences on walking to public transport than did neighbourhood physical characteristics. 2. Canadians who were exposed over time to highly walkable urban neighbourhoods were more likely to engage in moderate and high utilitarian walking than Canadians with less exposure to highly walkable neighbourhoods. A unit increase in the probability of spending more time in the fourth Walk Score® quartile neighborhoods increased the probability of moderate (increase of 4.0%, 95% C.I. 2.9%, 5.1%) and high utilitarian walking (increase of 7.7%, 95% C.I. 5.8%, 9.7%) compared to those spending the same time in low walkable neighbourhoods (first Walk Score® quartile neighbourhoods). Canadians who moved from neighbourhoods that were less walking-friendly to neighbourhoods of a higher walkability, were 59% (95% CI 3 %-146%) more likely to increase their utilitarian walking than those who moved to neighbourhoods with a similar walkability level. 3. Trajectories of body mass index (BMI - a measure of body weight adjusted for height) of Canadian men varied according to the friendliness of the urban built environment for walking, even after controlling for individual characteristics that influence body weight. Moving to more walkable neighbourhoods (2 Walk Score® quartiles higher), was associated with approximately a one unit (kg/m2) decrease in BMI for men (95% C.I. -1.7,-0.3). There was no detectable influence of neighbourhood walkability on body weight for women. Improving public transport service reliability and neighbourhood walkability have potential to increase utilitarian walking and decrease body mass index in populations, even for those who are otherwise inactive in their leisure time. Planning to construct walkable communities supported by reliable public transport should be considered among public health policies to promote utilitarian walking and reduce overweight and obesity.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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 score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.113

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.007
Science and technology studies0.0040.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.270 · 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

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicUrban Transport and Accessibility→French-language works237,207→