| Literature DB >> 25748111 |
Luis F Gomez1, Rodrigo Sarmiento2, Maria Fernanda Ordoñez2, Carlos Felipe Pardo3, Thiago Hérick de Sá4, Christina H Mallarino2, J Jaime Miranda5, Janeth Mosquera6, Diana C Parra7, Rodrigo Reis8, D Alex Quistberg9.
Abstract
This study summarizes the evidence from quantitative systematic reviews that assessed the association between urban environment attributes and physical activity. It also documents sociopolitical barriers and facilitators involved in urban interventions linked with active living in the ten most populated urban settings of Latin America. The synthesis of evidence indicates that several attributes of urban environments are associated with physical activity, including land-use mix and cycling infrastructure. The documentary analysis indicated that despite the benefits and opportunities provided by the programs and existing infrastructure in the examined cities, an overall concern is the rising inequality in the coverage and distribution of the initiatives in the region. If these programs and initiatives are to achieve a real population level effect that helps to reduce health disparities, they need to examine their social and spatial distribution within the cities so they can reach underserved populations and develop to their full potential.Entities:
Keywords: Latin America; Physical activity; Urban environments
Mesh:
Year: 2015 PMID: 25748111 PMCID: PMC4594859 DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2015.02.042
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Soc Sci Med ISSN: 0277-9536 Impact factor: 4.634
Figure 1Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) flow-chart of study selection.
Systematic reviews of urban interventions linked with physical activity promotion. Ordered by publication date.
| Review or meta-analysis | Number of studies[ | Countries | Study population | Study designs | Reviewed topic | Main findings | Rate of the methods used | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Identification and assessment of studies | Methods to analyse the findings | |||||||
|
| 9 | 6 in USA | Adults | 7 cross – sectional studies | Time spent in physical activity among adults using public transport | Using public transport adds 8 – 33 minutes walking per day with several papers reporting 12 – 15 minutes of additional physical activity per day. | Important limitations. | Reliable |
|
| 70 | 17 in United Kingdom | Adults aged between 18 – 65 years | 69 cross-sectional studies | Relationships between different attributes of the physical environment and diverse domains of physical activity in Europe | In Europe adults: walkability was positively related to total physical activity, transportation walking and transportation cycling. Access to shops/services/work was positively related to general active transportation and transportation cycling. Safety from traffic showed a positive association with recreational walking/cycling. Urbanization degree revealed a positive relationship with transportation cycling and a negative relationship with total physical activity. Quality of the environment was positively related to total physical activity. | Important limitations. | Reliable |
| 44 | 1 in Portugal | Children, adolescents and adults. | 39 cross-sectional studies. | Association between Smart Growth attributes and physical activity. | Several features of the built environment associated with smart growth planning may promote physical activity (open space preservation) and walking (range of housing choices, mixed land use, development toward existing communities and compact building design). | Important limitations. | Reliable | |
| 14 | 9 in USA | Children and adolescents. | 10 controlled cohort studies. | Assessment of interventions aimed at promoting active school transport. | Interventions that work toward a specific goal, in this case: increasing active transportation; involvement of school, parents and community seemed to be more effective than those that were broader in focus and with involvement of one or two of the actors. | Reliable, only minor limitations. | Reliable | |
| Fraser SD et al, 2011 | 21 | 14 in USA | Children, adolescents, adults and older adults. | 17 cross-sectional studies. | Associations between the built environment and cycling. | There are associations between objectively measured environmental factors and cycling, such as cycle routes or paths, population density, short trip distance, proximity to a cycle path or greenspace and safe routes to school. | Reliable, only minor limitations. | Important limitations |
|
| 25 | 13 in England. | Children and adults | 1 randomized controlled trial (individual). | Effectiveness of interventions to promote cycling. | Interventions applied at population level to promote cycling such as: Improvement to infrastructure for cycling, cycle training, free bike hire, Ride to work Day, educational and promotional campaigns had net increases of prevalence cycling or bicycle trips up to 3.4 percentage points. | Reliable, only minor limitations. | Reliable |
| McCormack GR et al, 2010. | 33 | 29 in USA. | Adults aged 18 years and over | 20 cross-sectional studies. | Associations between the built environment and physical activity despite neighborhood self-selection | Higher physical activity levels are associated with land use mix, composite walkability indices and neighborhood type even after controlling for neighborhood self-selection.. | Important limitations. | Reliable |
| Anderson et al, 2009 | 4 | 1 in Australia | Children, adolescents and adults. | 2 cross-sectional studies. | Effectiveness of diverse interventions on physical activity. | Policies targeting the built environment (policies that reduce barriers to physical activity, transport policies and policies to increase space for recreational activity) showed positive a effective results. | Important limitations. | Reliable, only minor limitations |
Number of studies linked with urban interventions to promote physical activity. Some systematic reviews included several types of interventions and this number may be a subset of the total studies.
Urban attributes and interventions positively associated with physical activity and their potential facilitators and barriers or challenges for implementation in the selected Latin American cities.
| Urban attributes and interventions | Systematic reviews | Physical activity modes | Examples in the selected Latin American cities. | Facilitators | Barriers and challenges |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Public transportation |
| Walking for transportation | Bus rapid transit system implemented in 7 of 10 cities, with the exception of Buenos Aires, Belo Horizonte, São Paulo and Caracas. | Low cost in comparison with rail systems. | High occupancy rates due to excess demand of users. |
| Public spaces for recreational activity[ | Anderson et al 2009. | Leisure time physical activity. | Ciclovia Program implemented in 9 of 10 cities, with the exception of Buenos Aires. | Social engagement groups committed. | Not all Ciclovia Programs cover urban areas of different socioeconomic status. Criticisms from some local commercial business nearby. |
| Cycling infrastructure | Fraser et al 2011, | Cycling for transport. | Bike paths and bike lanes implemented in 5 of 10 cities (Rio de Janeiro, México City, Buenos Aires, Bogotá and Santiago de Chile). | Social activism movements committed to the promotion of bicycling. | Limited connectivity between the bike-lane networks. |
| Compact building development and walkability[ | Walking for transportation. | There were no documented large scale experiences in the selected cities which have been implemented using urban policies. | |||
| Urban environments that support active transportation to school | Walking and cycling for transportation. | There were no documented experiences in the selected cities. |
Combination of commercial floor, space, connectivity, residential density and land use mix.
This urban attribute or intervention includes the Ciclovia program in which some of the main roads of the cities are closed to motor vehicles for seven daylight hours on Sundays and holidays and opened exclusively to pedestrians and cyclists.
Systematic reviews and meta-analysis excluded of the umbrella reviewed due to fatal flaws based on SURE. Ordered by publication date.
| Review or meta-analysis | Reasons for exclusion |
|---|---|
| Ferdinand AO et al 2012 | No quality assessment of the included studies. Heterogeneity makes difficult the approach to the bias. There was language bias, no contact with authors/expert. Not clear if the screening was made by 2 authors.. |
| Van Cauwenberg J et al 2011. | No assessment for bias in the results analysis, Not clear if there was an independent review of the articles by different authors in the screening or full text phases. Language bias, no excluded studies list provided. No/poor examination of the specific factors that might explain differences in the results of the included studies |
| Wong BY et al 2011. | No assessment of risk of bias, not clear how many authors participate in the screening of full text articles, no list of excluded studies provided, language bias, no contact with authors/experts. No explicit selection criteria. No type of studies listed. There was not a sensible method used to explore the extent to which key factors explaines heterogeneity |
| Faulkner G et al, 2008. | No clear assessment for bias in the results analysis. Language bias, no authors/experts contact, no excluded studies list provided. No type of study included specified. Not clear if there was an independent review by different authors |
| Wendel-Vos W et al 2007. | No assessment of the risk of bias. Language bias, no contact with authors/experts, no reference lists in included articles checked. No list of excluded studies provided. Not reasonably up-to-date. There was not a sensible method used to explore the extent to which key factors explains heterogeneity |
| Duncan MJ et al, 2005. | No assessment of risk of bias. Vague explanation of the inclusion criteria: search criteria not explicit, type of population, age and type of study not described. Screening of full text by 1 reviewer, no list of excluded studies provided. No explicit selection criteria. There was not a sensible method used to explore the extent to which key factors explains heterogeneity |