BACKGROUND: Parks are an important setting for leisure-time physical activity. Understanding how to attract residents to parks and encourage park users to be physically active is an important public health initiative. Natural experiments are a research priority for investigating whether changes to the physical environment affect physical activity; however, natural experiments involving parks have rarely been conducted. PURPOSE: This natural experiment examined whether improvements to a park in Victoria, Australia, increased its use and park-based physical activity of users. METHODS: Observational data were collected on park use and park-based activity among park users at the intervention park and a control park at three time points; baseline (T1, August 2009); post-improvement (T2, March 2010); and 12 months after baseline (T3, August 2010). At each time point, observations were undertaken during three 1.5-hour periods each day on 9 days. Analyses were conducted in 2011. RESULTS: In the intervention park, there were significant increases from pre- to post-improvement in the number of park users (T1=235, T3=985) and the number of people observed walking (T1=155, T3=369) and being vigorously active (T1=38, T3=257). At the control park, counts of usage decreased over the same period and no differences in walking or vigorous activity were observed. CONCLUSIONS: Improving the features of a local neighborhood park may lead to increased usage and physical activity. Crown
BACKGROUND: Parks are an important setting for leisure-time physical activity. Understanding how to attract residents to parks and encourage park users to be physically active is an important public health initiative. Natural experiments are a research priority for investigating whether changes to the physical environment affect physical activity; however, natural experiments involving parks have rarely been conducted. PURPOSE: This natural experiment examined whether improvements to a park in Victoria, Australia, increased its use and park-based physical activity of users. METHODS: Observational data were collected on park use and park-based activity among park users at the intervention park and a control park at three time points; baseline (T1, August 2009); post-improvement (T2, March 2010); and 12 months after baseline (T3, August 2010). At each time point, observations were undertaken during three 1.5-hour periods each day on 9 days. Analyses were conducted in 2011. RESULTS: In the intervention park, there were significant increases from pre- to post-improvement in the number of park users (T1=235, T3=985) and the number of people observed walking (T1=155, T3=369) and being vigorously active (T1=38, T3=257). At the control park, counts of usage decreased over the same period and no differences in walking or vigorous activity were observed. CONCLUSIONS: Improving the features of a local neighborhood park may lead to increased usage and physical activity. Crown
Authors: Orion T Stewart; Anne Vernez Moudon; Alyson J Littman; Edmund Seto; Brian E Saelens Journal: J Urban Health Date: 2018-12 Impact factor: 3.671
Authors: Andrea S Richardson; Madhumita Ghosh-Dastidar; Rebecca L Collins; Gerald P Hunter; Wendy M Troxel; Natalie Colabianchi; Deborah A Cohen; Tamara Dubowitz Journal: J Urban Health Date: 2020-04 Impact factor: 3.671
Authors: Kathryn Pitkin Derose; Terry Marsh; Mark Mariscal; Sophia Pina-Cortez; Deborah A Cohen Journal: Prev Med Date: 2014-03-25 Impact factor: 4.018