PURPOSE: To determine whether body mass index (BMI) is associated with proximity to neighborhood parks, the size of the parks, their cleanliness, and the availability of recreational facilities in the parks. DESIGN: Cross-sectional. SETTING: New York City. SUBJECTS: Adults (13,102) were recruited from 2000 to 2002 (median age 45 years, 36% male). MEASURES: Anthropometric and sociodemographic data from study subjects were linked to Department of Parks & Recreation data on park space, cleanliness, and facilities. Neighborhood-level sociodemographic and park proximity metrics were created for half-mile-radius circular buffers around each subject's residence. Proximity to park space was measured as the proportion of the subject's neighborhood buffer area that was total park space, large park space (a park > 6 acres) and small park space (a park ≤ 6 acres). Analysis. Hierarchical linear models were used to determine whether neighborhood park metrics were associated with BMI. RESULTS: Higher proximity to large park space was significantly associated with lower BMI (beta = -1.69, 95% confidence interval = -2.76, -.63). Across the population distribution of proximity to large park space, compared to subjects living in neighborhoods at the 10th percentile of the distribution, the covariate-adjusted average BMI was estimated to be .35 kg/m lower for those living in neighborhoods at the 90th percentile. The proportion of neighborhood area that was small park space was not associated with BMI, nor was park cleanliness or the availability of recreational facilities. CONCLUSION: Neighborhood proximity to large park spaces is modestly associated with lower BMI in a diverse urban population.
PURPOSE: To determine whether body mass index (BMI) is associated with proximity to neighborhood parks, the size of the parks, their cleanliness, and the availability of recreational facilities in the parks. DESIGN: Cross-sectional. SETTING: New York City. SUBJECTS: Adults (13,102) were recruited from 2000 to 2002 (median age 45 years, 36% male). MEASURES: Anthropometric and sociodemographic data from study subjects were linked to Department of Parks & Recreation data on park space, cleanliness, and facilities. Neighborhood-level sociodemographic and park proximity metrics were created for half-mile-radius circular buffers around each subject's residence. Proximity to park space was measured as the proportion of the subject's neighborhood buffer area that was total park space, large park space (a park > 6 acres) and small park space (a park ≤ 6 acres). Analysis. Hierarchical linear models were used to determine whether neighborhood park metrics were associated with BMI. RESULTS: Higher proximity to large park space was significantly associated with lower BMI (beta = -1.69, 95% confidence interval = -2.76, -.63). Across the population distribution of proximity to large park space, compared to subjects living in neighborhoods at the 10th percentile of the distribution, the covariate-adjusted average BMI was estimated to be .35 kg/m lower for those living in neighborhoods at the 90th percentile. The proportion of neighborhood area that was small park space was not associated with BMI, nor was park cleanliness or the availability of recreational facilities. CONCLUSION: Neighborhood proximity to large park spaces is modestly associated with lower BMI in a diverse urban population.
Authors: Jennifer Wolch; Michael Jerrett; Kim Reynolds; Rob McConnell; Roger Chang; Nicholas Dahmann; Kirby Brady; Frank Gilliland; Jason G Su; Kiros Berhane Journal: Health Place Date: 2010-10-15 Impact factor: 4.078
Authors: Deborah A Cohen; Thomas L McKenzie; Amber Sehgal; Stephanie Williamson; Daniela Golinelli; Nicole Lurie Journal: Am J Public Health Date: 2007-01-31 Impact factor: 9.308
Authors: Christopher C Weiss; Marnie Purciel; Michael Bader; James W Quinn; Gina Lovasi; Kathryn M Neckerman; Andrew G Rundle Journal: J Urban Health Date: 2011-04 Impact factor: 3.671
Authors: Andrew Rundle; Sam Field; Yoosun Park; Lance Freeman; Christopher C Weiss; Kathryn Neckerman Journal: Soc Sci Med Date: 2008-10-25 Impact factor: 4.634
Authors: Melissa L Potestio; Alka B Patel; Christopher D Powell; Deborah A McNeil; R Daniel Jacobson; Lindsay McLaren Journal: Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act Date: 2009-11-20 Impact factor: 6.457
Authors: Russell R Pate; Natalie Colabianchi; Dwayne Porter; Maria J Almeida; Felipe Lobelo; Marsha Dowda Journal: Am J Prev Med Date: 2008-05 Impact factor: 5.043
Authors: Tanya K Kaufman; Andrew Rundle; Kathryn M Neckerman; Daniel M Sheehan; Gina S Lovasi; Jana A Hirsch Journal: J Urban Health Date: 2019-08 Impact factor: 3.671
Authors: Sandy J Slater; Elizabeth Tarlov; Kelly Jones; Stephen A Matthews; Coady Wing; Shannon N Zenk Journal: Health Place Date: 2019-02-06 Impact factor: 4.078
Authors: Shannon M Conroy; Salma Shariff-Marco; Juan Yang; Andrew Hertz; Myles Cockburn; Yurii B Shvetsov; Christina A Clarke; Cheryl L Abright; Christopher A Haiman; Loïc Le Marchand; Laurence N Kolonel; Kristine R Monroe; Lynne R Wilkens; Scarlett Lin Gomez; Iona Cheng Journal: Cancer Causes Control Date: 2017-12-08 Impact factor: 2.506
Authors: Adam Drewnowski; Anju Aggarwal; Colin D Rehm; Hannah Cohen-Cline; Philip M Hurvitz; Anne V Moudon Journal: Am J Prev Med Date: 2014-07-19 Impact factor: 5.043