| Literature DB >> 23898839 |
Chinmoy Sarkar1, John Gallacher, Chris Webster.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Few studies have examined the impact of the built environment configuration upon mental health. The study examines the impact of objectively assessed land use and street network configuration upon psychological distress and whether this association is moderated by the natural environment and area-level deprivation.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2013 PMID: 23898839 PMCID: PMC3735426 DOI: 10.1186/1471-2458-13-695
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Public Health ISSN: 1471-2458 Impact factor: 3.295
Figure 1Analysis of street movement potential at various scales for the study area. Space syntax based network analysis was performed over the Ordnance Survey ITN layer. © Crown copyright UK Ordnance Survey. All rights reserved.
Characteristics of the study sample according to GHQ status
| | | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Age; Mean (SD) | 73.7 (4.3) | 73.5 (4.3) | 0.549 |
| Alcohol consumption; Mean (SD) | 49.8 (100.6) | 57.5 (96.7) | 0.018 |
| Social class (partly skilled/unskilled); N(%) | 25 (18.8) | 72 (13.0) | 0.085 |
| Educational attainment (None/apprenticeship); N(%) | 92 (69.2) | 336 (60.6) | 0.050 |
| Prevalence of chronic disease | | | |
| Heart attack/coronary thrombosis; N(%) | 29 (21.8) | 70 (12.6) | 0.007 |
| Angina; N(%) | 46 (34.6) | 105 (19.0) | 0.005 |
| High blood pressure; N(%) | 72 (54.1) | 241 (43.5) | 0.027 |
| High cholesterol; N(%) | 42 (31.6) | 163 (29.4) | 0.626 |
| Diabetes; N(%) | 22 (16.5) | 73 (13.2) | 0.313 |
| Stroke; N(%) | 23 (17.3) | 52 (9.4) | 0.006 |
Summary of environment variables
| | | |
| | | |
| Dwelling centred density (within 30 m radius) | 14.29 (6.64) | 1 – 40 |
| Dwelling types; N (%) Detached | 156 (22.70) | |
| Semi- detached | 299 (43.52) | |
| Terraced | 176 (25.63) | |
| Flats | 56 (8.15) | |
| Plot exposure; N (%) No building fonts exposed to public space | 76 (11.06) | |
| One building fonts exposed to public space | 471 (68.56) | |
| More than one building fonts exposed to public space | 140 (20.38) | |
| | | |
| Land use mix | 0.14 (0.03) | 0.03 – 0.21 |
| Density of bus stops | 23.96 (6.00) | 7.66 – 50.46 |
| Density of retail | 26.92 (27.58) | 1.40 – 140.7 |
| Density of community services | 14.36 (9.93) | 1.00 – 50.95 |
| Density of recreation & leisure facilities | 12.91 (5.11) | 2.12 – 34.49 |
| Density of business & offices | 30.69 (32.76) | 0.87 – 130.53 |
| | | |
| Street movement potential R1200 m | 2.40 (0.17) | 1.76 – 2.82 |
| Street movement potential R3000 m | 3.01 (0.21) | 2.40 – 3.54 |
| Street movement potential RNm (all networks segments) | 3.63 (0.20) | 2.92 – 4.29 |
| Connectivity | 3.13 (0.19) | 2.66 – 3.65 |
| | | |
| | | |
| Neighbourhood slope variability ( | 3.31 | 0.99 – 8.04 |
| | | |
| Mean NDVI | 0.091 | −0.06 – 0.33 |
| | | |
| WIMD −2005 (within census defined lower super output areas)f | | |
| Income domain | 24.05 (19.78) | 0.34 – 90.32 |
| Employment domain | 25.73 (19.14) | 1.00 – 95.02 |
| Health domain | 25.64 (15.71) | 1.70 – 72.3 |
| Education domain | 25.82 (16.95) | 0.59 – 62.32 |
| Housing domain | 10.91 (7.44) | 0.19 – 27.23 |
| Physical domain | 19.11 (14.63) | 1.61 – 65.4 |
aDwelling level data extracted from Ordnance Survey Address Layer 2.
bLand use data was extracted from Ordnance Survey Address Layer 2.
c Street network was extracted from Ordnance Survey Integrated Transport Network Layer, transformed and subjected to space syntax analysis in Confeego. Measured for each street segment at varying radii of capture the effect of multiple urban scales: regional/city scale (N, 3000 m), and local/walking distance scale (1200 m). Thereafter, connectivity and street movement potential were aggregated at the level of a 1 km street network buffer.
dSlope raster was processed from the BlueSky 5 metre resolution DTM). Measured as the standard deviation of slope in degrees within 1 km street network buffer.
eGreenness was measured as the Normalized Difference Vegetation Index (NDVI) from the 30 m Landsat data.
fArea-level deprivation was expressed in terms of the six domain indices of the Welsh Index of Multiple Deprivation, aggregated at the small area level of LSOAs.
Two-level logistic mixed effects models with LSOA-level random effects for psychological distress measured by GHQ-30
| | | | |
| | | | |
| Dwelling centred density | 1.02 (−0.02, 0.06) p = 0.20 | | 1.01 (−0.03, 0.05) p = 0.32 |
| Plot exposure (none vs. one bldg face) | 0.92 (−0.78, 0.57) p = 0.40 | | 0.94 (−0.78, 0.61) p = 0.43 |
| Plot exposure (more than one faces vs. one bldg face) | 0.78 (−0.79, 0.27) p = 0.18 | | 0.79 (−0.81, 0.30) p = 0.20 |
| Dwelling type (semi-detached vs. detached) | 0.72 (−0.89, 0.23) p = 0.12 | | 0.76 (−0.86, 0.30) p = 0.18 |
| Dwelling type (terraced vs. detached) | 0.55 (−1.35, 0.15) p = 0.06* | | 0.48 (−1.51, 0.02) p = 0.03** |
| Dwelling type (flat vs. detached) | 0.72 (−1.34, 0.64) p = 0.25 | | 0.82 (−1.19, 0.79) p = 0.35 |
| | | | |
| Land use mix (z-score) | | | |
| T2 vs. T1 | 0.72 (−0.93, 0.27) p = 0.14 | | 0.63 (−1.10, 0.18) p = 0.08* |
| T3 vs. T1 | 0.51 (−1.51, 0.19) p = 0.06* | | 0.42 (−1.77, 0.04) p = 0.03** |
| Density of bus stops | 1.04 (−0.01, 0.10) p = 0.07* | | 1.04 (−0.02, 0.10) p = 0.07* |
| Density of retail | 0.99 (−0.04, 0.02) p = 0.31 | | 1.00 (−0.04, 0.03) p = 0.45 |
| Density of community services | 1.01 (−0.04, 0.06) p = 0.42 | | 1.00 (−0.06, 0.06) p = 0.47 |
| Density of recreation & leisure facilities | 0.98 (−0.08, 0.04) p = 0.24 | | 0.98 (−0.08, 0.05) p = 0.33 |
| Density of business & offices | 1.02 (0.00, 0.03) p = 0.06* | | 1.02 (−0.01, 0.04) p = 0.08* |
| | | | |
| Street movement potential R1200 m | 0.56 (−1.13, -0.01) p = 0.02** | | 0.54 (−1.28, 0.03) p = 0.03** |
| Street movement potential R3000 m | 0.95 (−0.61, 0.47) p = 0.43 | | 1.14 (−0.69, 0.94) p = 0.38 |
| Street movement potential RN m | 1.53 (0.04, 0.81) p = 0.02** | | 1.24 (−0.39, 0.83) p = 0.25 |
| Connectivity | 1.10 (−0.20, 0.39) p = 0.25 | | 1.18 (−0.17, 0.49) p = 0.16 |
| | | | |
| Topography (Standard deviation in slope) | | 1.24 (−0.03, 0.47)p = 0.04** | 1.38 (−0.07, 0.71) p = 0.05** |
| Greenness (Mean NDVI within 500 m) | | 0.82 (−0.51, 0.10) p = 0.10* | 0.79 (−0.66, 0.21) p = 0.14 |
| | | | |
| WIMD domains | | | |
| Income deprivation | | 1.03 (0.00, 0.07) p = 0.04** | 1.03 (−0.02, 0.07) p = 0.11 |
| Employment deprivation | | 0.97 (−0.07, 0.00) p = 0.03** | 0.96 (−0.08, 0.00) p = 0.02** |
| Health deprivation | | 0.99 (−0.03, 0.01) p = 0.13 | 0.99 (−0.03, 0.02) p = 0.31 |
| Education deprivation | | 1.00 (−0.04, 0.03) p = 0.42 | 1.02 (−0.03, 0.06) p = 0.21 |
| Housing deprivation | | 1.00 (−0.04, 0.04) p = 0.47 | 1.00 (−0.05, 0.04) p = 0.46 |
| Physical environment | | 1.02 (0.00, 0.04) p = 0.01** | 1.02 (0.00, 0.04) p = 0.04** |
| | | | |
| Between LSOA variance (S.E.) | 0.054 (0.083) | 0.025 (0.039) | 0.042 (0.079) |
| | | | |
| Bayesian DIC | 690.02 | 675.53 | 695.05 |
Results are expressed as odds ratio, 95% confidence interval and p-value for the logistic regression. All models have been adjusted for individual level variables of age, alcohol consumption, social class, education and prevalence of chronic vascular morbidities.
T Tertile (T1, T2, T3 represents the lower, middle and upper tertiles respectively).
*p < 0.10; **p < 0.05.
Model 1 comprises of built environmental morphometrics; Model 2 included neighbourhood deprivation captured by six domains of Welsh index of multiple deprivation and natural environment captured by standard deviation in slope and mean greenness index NDVI; Model 3 indicates the fully adjusted model.