BACKGROUND: The built environment can constrain or facilitate physical activity. Most studies of the health consequences of the built environment face problems of selection bias associated with confounding effects of residential choice and transportation decisions. PURPOSE: To examine the cross-sectional associations between objective and perceived measures of the built environment; BMI; obesity (BMI>30 kg/m(2)); and meeting weekly recommended physical activity (RPA) levels through walking and vigorous exercise. To assess the effect of using light rail transit (LRT) system on BMI, obesity, and weekly RPA levels. METHODS: Data were collected on individuals before (July 2006-February 2007) and after (March 2008-July 2008) completion of an LRT system in Charlotte NC. BMI, obesity, and physical activity levels were calculated for a comparison of these factors pre- and post-LRT construction. A propensity score weighting approach adjusted for differences in baseline characteristics among LRT and non-LRT users. Data were analyzed in 2009. RESULTS: More-positive perceptions of one's neighborhood at baseline were associated with a -0.36 (p<0.05) lower BMI; 15% lower odds (95% CI=0.77, 0.94) of obesity; 9% higher odds (95% CI=0.99, 1.20) of meeting weekly RPA through walking; and 11% higher odds (95% CI=1.01, 1.22) of meeting RPA levels of vigorous exercise. The use of LRT to commute to work was associated with an average -1.18 reduction in BMI (p<0.05) and an 81% reduced odds (95% CI=0.04, 0.92) of becoming obese over time. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study suggest that improving neighborhood environments and increasing the public's use of LRT systems could provide improvements in health outcomes for millions of individuals. 2010 American Journal of Preventive Medicine. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
BACKGROUND: The built environment can constrain or facilitate physical activity. Most studies of the health consequences of the built environment face problems of selection bias associated with confounding effects of residential choice and transportation decisions. PURPOSE: To examine the cross-sectional associations between objective and perceived measures of the built environment; BMI; obesity (BMI>30 kg/m(2)); and meeting weekly recommended physical activity (RPA) levels through walking and vigorous exercise. To assess the effect of using light rail transit (LRT) system on BMI, obesity, and weekly RPA levels. METHODS: Data were collected on individuals before (July 2006-February 2007) and after (March 2008-July 2008) completion of an LRT system in Charlotte NC. BMI, obesity, and physical activity levels were calculated for a comparison of these factors pre- and post-LRT construction. A propensity score weighting approach adjusted for differences in baseline characteristics among LRT and non-LRT users. Data were analyzed in 2009. RESULTS: More-positive perceptions of one's neighborhood at baseline were associated with a -0.36 (p<0.05) lower BMI; 15% lower odds (95% CI=0.77, 0.94) of obesity; 9% higher odds (95% CI=0.99, 1.20) of meeting weekly RPA through walking; and 11% higher odds (95% CI=1.01, 1.22) of meeting RPA levels of vigorous exercise. The use of LRT to commute to work was associated with an average -1.18 reduction in BMI (p<0.05) and an 81% reduced odds (95% CI=0.04, 0.92) of becoming obese over time. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study suggest that improving neighborhood environments and increasing the public's use of LRT systems could provide improvements in health outcomes for millions of individuals. 2010 American Journal of Preventive Medicine. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Authors: Andrew L Dannenberg; Richard J Jackson; Howard Frumkin; Richard A Schieber; Michael Pratt; Chris Kochtitzky; Hugh H Tilson Journal: Am J Public Health Date: 2003-09 Impact factor: 9.308
Authors: Frank M Sacks; George A Bray; Vincent J Carey; Steven R Smith; Donna H Ryan; Stephen D Anton; Katherine McManus; Catherine M Champagne; Louise M Bishop; Nancy Laranjo; Meryl S Leboff; Jennifer C Rood; Lilian de Jonge; Frank L Greenway; Catherine M Loria; Eva Obarzanek; Donald A Williamson Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2009-02-26 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Magdalena Cerdá; Jeffrey D Morenoff; Ben B Hansen; Kimberly J Tessari Hicks; Luis F Duque; Alexandra Restrepo; Ana V Diez-Roux Journal: Am J Epidemiol Date: 2012-04-02 Impact factor: 4.897
Authors: Alfredo Morabia; Fang Fang Zhang; Maya A Kappil; Janine Flory; Frank E Mirer; Regina M Santella; Mary Wolff; Steven B Markowitz Journal: Prev Med Date: 2012-01-31 Impact factor: 4.018
Authors: Eva Tseng; Allen Zhang; Oluwaseun Shogbesan; Kimberly A Gudzune; Renee F Wilson; Hadi Kharrazi; Lawrence J Cheskin; Eric B Bass; Wendy L Bennett Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2018-09-11 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Barbara B Brown; Carol M Werner; Calvin P Tribby; Harvey J Miller; Ken R Smith Journal: Am J Public Health Date: 2015-05-14 Impact factor: 9.308
Authors: David Ogilvie; Simon Griffin; Andy Jones; Roger Mackett; Cornelia Guell; Jenna Panter; Natalia Jones; Simon Cohn; Lin Yang; Cheryl Chapman Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2010-11-16 Impact factor: 3.295