| Literature DB >> 24886211 |
Richard Larouche1, Jean-Philippe Chaput, Geneviève Leduc, Charles Boyer, Priscilla Bélanger, Allana G LeBlanc, Michael M Borghese, Mark S Tremblay.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Active school transport (AST) is an important source of children's daily physical activity (PA). However, decreasing rates of AST have been reported in multiple countries during the last decades. The purpose of the present study was to examine the socio-demographic and school-level correlates of AST.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2014 PMID: 24886211 PMCID: PMC4049506 DOI: 10.1186/1471-2458-14-497
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Public Health ISSN: 1471-2458 Impact factor: 3.295
Socio-demographic correlates of active school transport
| Gender | Boys | 239 | 42.2 | 1.98 | 1.31-2.98 | .001 |
| Girls | 328 | 57.8 | Reference | |||
| School travel mode | Active | 199 | 35.1 | N/A | ||
| Public transport | 368 | 64.9 | ||||
| School travel time | <5 minutes | 134 | 23.6 | 2.39 | 1.24-4.63 | .010 |
| 5-15 minutes | 289 | 51.0 | 2.44 | 1.37-4.34 | .002 | |
| >15 minutes | 144 | 25.4 | Reference | |||
| Household income | <$60,000 | 105 | 19.3 | 0.77 | 0.40-1.49 | .439 |
| $60,000-$139,999 | 231 | 42.4 | 0.87 | 0.54-1.40 | .552 | |
| ≥$140,000 | 209 | 38.3 | Reference | |||
| Mother’s education | <College | 85 | 15.2 | 1.52 | 0.84-2.76 | .169 |
| College | 142 | 25.4 | 0.72 | 0.43-1.21 | .216 | |
| University | 331 | 59.3 | Reference | |||
| Motorized vehicles | ≤1 | 236 | 42.1 | 1.25 | 0.81-1.94 | .321 |
| ≥2 | 325 | 57.9 | Reference | |||
| School language | French | 99 | 17.5 | 0.19 | 0.06-0.64 | .007 |
| English | 468 | 82.5 | Reference | |||
| School board | Catholic | 114 | 20.1 | 0.61 | 0.09-1.06 | .061 |
| Public | 453 | 79.9 | Reference | |||
Note: Odds ratios for engaging in active transportation were estimated using generalized linear mixed models adjusted only for school clustering.
School-level correlates of active school transport, as reported by school administrators
| Physical activity policies* | Existing policies | 501 | 88.4 | 1.99 | 0.38-10.46 | .415 |
| Practices | 66 | 11.6 | Reference | |||
| Healthy eating policies* | Existing policies | 499 | 88.0 | 0.51 | 0.10-2.58 | .413 |
| Practices | 68 | 12.0 | Reference | |||
| Identify safe routes to school | Yes | 289 | 51.0 | 3.63 | 1.39-9.44 | .008 |
| No | 278 | 49.0 | Reference | |||
| Provides crossing guards | Yes | 284 | 50.1 | 5.75 | 2.52-13.10 | <.001 |
| No | 283 | 49.9 | Reference | |||
| Designate car free zone | Yes | 238 | 42.0 | 1.52 | 0.52-4.49 | .448 |
| No | 329 | 58.0 | Reference | |||
| Allow students to bring bicycles* | Yes | 534 | 94.2 | 3.29 | 0.48-22.42 | .224 |
| No | 33 | 5.8 | Reference | |||
| Allow students to bring small wheel vehicles† | Yes | 351 | 61.9 | 2.72 | 0.94-7.84 | .064 |
| No | 216 | 38.1 | Reference | |||
| Encourage use of helmets and safety gear* | Yes | 544 | 95.9 | 1.17 | 0.14-9.53 | .887 |
| No | 23 | 4.1 | Reference | |||
| Organize events (i.e. walk to school days) | Yes | 131 | 23.1 | 1.25 | 0.38-4.13 | .718 |
| No/don’t know | 436 | 76.9 | Reference | |||
| Access to bike racks during school hours* | Yes, on grounds only | 527 | 92.9 | 2.98 | 0.50-17.70 | .229 |
| No | 40 | 7.1 | Reference | |||
| Bikes stored in a secure area | Yes | 383 | 67.5 | 1.38 | 0.45-4.22 | .571 |
| No/don’t know | 184 | 32.5 | Reference | |||
| Religious tension perceived as problem* | Major/moderate | 43 | 7.6 | 1.73 | 0.29-10.13 | .544 |
| Minor | 153 | 27.0 | 1.68 | 0.43-6.62 | .459 | |
| No problem or don’t know | 372 | 65.4 | Reference | |||
| Garbage/litter perceived as problem* | Major/moderate | 52 | 9.2 | 3.31 | 0.66-16.52 | .145 |
| Minor | 235 | 41.4 | 1.69 | 0.52-5.47 | .380 | |
| No problem or don’t know | 280 | 49.4 | Reference | |||
| Drugs/drinking perceived as problem* | Major/moderate | 30 | 5.3 | 4.36 | 0.78-24.54 | .094 |
| Minor | 92 | 16.2 | 0.72 | 0.14-3.56 | .683 | |
| No/don’t know | 445 | 78.5 | Reference | |||
| Gangs perceived as problem* | Major/moderate | 25 | 4.4 | 3.98 | 0.64-24.87 | .140 |
| Minor | 45 | 7.9 | 1.47 | 0.27-7.99 | .654 | |
| No problem or don’t know | 497 | 87.7 | Reference | |||
| Traffic perceived as problem | Major/moderate | 126 | 22.2 | 3.41 | 0.86-13.56 | .081 |
| Minor | 254 | 44.8 | 1.30 | 0.39-4.37 | .671 | |
| No problem or don’t know | 187 | 33.0 | Reference | |||
| Vacant/shabby housing perceived as problem* | Major/moderate | 28 | 4.9 | 4.11 | 0.73-23.32 | .110 |
| Minor | 43 | 7.6 | 4.26 | 0.58-31.15 | .153 | |
| No problem or don’t know | 496 | 87.5 | Reference | |||
| Crime perceived as problem* | Major/moderate | 33 | 5.8 | 5.99 | 1.24-28.87 | .026 |
| Minor | 190 | 33.5 | 1.89 | 0.57-6.29 | .302 | |
| No problem or don’t know | 344 | 60.7 | Reference | |||
Note: Odds ratios for engaging in active transportation were estimated using generalized linear mixed models adjusted only for school clustering. *Denotes that fewer than 5 schools have one of the categories being compared; these results should be interpreted with caution. †Includes skateboard, rollerblades, scooters.
School-level correlates of active school transport, as observed in the school audit†
| Predominant land use around school* | Residential | 508 | 89.6 | 0.64 | 0.14-2.95 | .643 |
| Others | 59 | 10.4 | Reference | |||
| Place where parents can stop and drop children off* | No | 8 | 1.4 | 7.69 | 0.72-81.90 | .091 |
| Yes | 559 | 98.6 | Reference | |||
| Place where parents can park their cars* | No | 88 | 15.5 | 2.32 | 0.44-12.16 | .319 |
| Yes | 479 | 84.5 | Reference | |||
| Bus stop | No | 85 | 15.0 | 2.00 | 0.57-7.02 | .276 |
| Yes | 482 | 85.0 | Reference | |||
| Cycle lane separated from the road* | No | 567 | 100.0 | N/A | ||
| Yes | 0 | 0.0 | ||||
| Cycle lane on the road | No | 531 | 93.7 | 0.46 | 0.03-6.48 | .556 |
| Yes | 36 | 6.3 | Reference | |||
| Sidewalks on both sides‡ | No | 93 | 16.4 | 3.07 | 0.85-11.04 | .086 |
| Yes | 474 | 83.6 | Reference | |||
| Sidewalks on one side only | No | 328 | 57.8 | 0.37 | 0.13-1.04 | .060 |
| Yes | 239 | 42.2 | Reference | |||
| Marked pedestrian crossing | No | 104 | 18.3 | 3.17 | 0.98-10.27 | .054 |
| Yes | 463 | 81.7 | Reference | |||
| Traffic calming measures | No | 333 | 58.7 | 4.05 | 1.52-10.79 | .005 |
| Yes | 234 | 41.3 | Reference | |||
| School warning sign for road users* | No | 11 | 1.9 | 1.12 | 0.07-19.16 | .937 |
| Yes | 556 | 98.1 | Reference | |||
| Road safety sign | No | 56 | 9.9 | 1.29 | 0.32-5.12 | .722 |
| Yes | 501 | 90.1 | Reference | |||
| Route sign for cyclists | No | 437 | 77.1 | 0.55 | 0.16-1.91 | .345 |
| Yes | 130 | 22.9 | Reference | |||
| Fast food restaurants | No | 352 | 62.1 | 0.41 | 0.14-1.20 | .102 |
| Yes | 215 | 37.9 | Reference | |||
Note: Odds ratios for engaging in active transportation were estimated using generalized linear mixed models adjusted only for school clustering. *Denotes that fewer than 5 schools have one of the categories being compared; these results should be interpreted with caution. †For all school audit items except land uses, the auditor was asked to specify if any of the items were visible from any school entrance. ‡If any of the road segments observed had sidewalks on both sides, this item was coded as yes.
Multivariate associations of socio-demographic and school-level factors with children’s engagement in active transportation
| Gender | Boys | 1.99 | 1.30-3.03 | .002 |
| Girls | Reference | |||
| School travel time | <5 minutes | 2.26 | 1.17-4.37 | .015 |
| 5-15 minutes | 2.27 | 1.27-4.03 | .006 | |
| >15 minutes | Reference | |||
| School language | French | 0.71 | 0.31-1.62 | .411 |
| English | Reference | |||
| Identify safe routes to school | Yes | 1.03 | 0.52-2.04 | .935 |
| No | Reference | |||
| Provides crossing guards | Yes | 2.29 | 1.22-4.30 | .010 |
| No | Reference | |||
| Crime perceived as problem* | Major/moderate | 3.34 | 1.34-8.32 | .010 |
| Minor | 1.19 | 0.68-2.08 | .543 | |
| Not a problem | Reference | |||
| Traffic calming measures | Yes | 1.06 | 0.52-2.16 | .865 |
| No | Reference | |||
| Safe routes to school X Traffic calming interaction | Both yes | 7.87 | 2.85-21.76 | <.001 |
| Both no | Reference | |||
Note: Odds ratios for engaging in active transportation were estimated using generalized linear mixed models adjusted only for school clustering. Only variables that were significantly associated with active school transport in the bivariate models (e.g., Tables 1, 2, 3) were included in the multivariate model. In the empty model, the school ICC was 0.31 (p < 0.001) while in the fully adjusted model, it was 0.01 (p = 0.718). *Denotes that fewer than 5 schools have one of the categories being compared; these results should be interpreted with caution.
Figure 1Joint association of safe routes to school and traffic calming measures with active school transport. Note: School administrators were asked whether their school identified safe routes for children to travel. The presence of traffic calming measures around the school was observed as part of a standardized audit performed by study staff. AST = Active school transport.