Karen Glanz1, James F Sallis2, Brian E Saelens3. 1. Department of Biostatistics and Epidemiology, Perelman School of Medicine and School of Nursing, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. Electronic address: kglanz@upenn.edu. 2. Department of Family Medicine and Public Health, University of California, San Diego, San Diego, California. 3. Department of Pediatrics, University of Washington, Seattle Children's Research Institute, Seattle, Washington.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: In the past 15 years, researchers, practitioners, and community residents and leaders have become increasingly interested in associations among built environments and physical activity, diet, and obesity. Numerous tools to measure activity and food environments have been developed but vary in quality and usability. Future progress depends on aligning these tools with new communication technology and increasing their utility for planning and policy. METHODS: The Built Environment Assessment Training Institute Think Thank was held in July 2013. Expert participants discussed priorities, gaps, and promising opportunities to advance the science and practice of measuring obesity-related built environments. Participants proposed and voted on recommended future directions in two categories: "big ideas" and additional recommendations. RESULTS: Recommendations for the first "big idea" involve developing new, simplified built environment assessment tools and deploying them through online trainings and easily accessible web-based apps. Future iterations of the tools would link to databases of key locations (e.g., parks, food stores); have built-in scoring and analysis; and provide clear, simple feedback to users. A second "big idea" addresses dissemination of results from built environment assessments and translation into policies including land use and food access planning. Additional recommendations include (1) improving multidisciplinary collaborations; (2) engaging stakeholders across sectors; (3) centralized data resource centers; (4) increased use of emerging technologies to communicate findings; and (5) advocating for expanded funding for measurement development, training, and dissemination. CONCLUSIONS: Implementing these recommendations is likely to improve the quality of built environment measures and expand their use in research and practice.
INTRODUCTION: In the past 15 years, researchers, practitioners, and community residents and leaders have become increasingly interested in associations among built environments and physical activity, diet, and obesity. Numerous tools to measure activity and food environments have been developed but vary in quality and usability. Future progress depends on aligning these tools with new communication technology and increasing their utility for planning and policy. METHODS: The Built Environment Assessment Training Institute Think Thank was held in July 2013. Expert participants discussed priorities, gaps, and promising opportunities to advance the science and practice of measuring obesity-related built environments. Participants proposed and voted on recommended future directions in two categories: "big ideas" and additional recommendations. RESULTS: Recommendations for the first "big idea" involve developing new, simplified built environment assessment tools and deploying them through online trainings and easily accessible web-based apps. Future iterations of the tools would link to databases of key locations (e.g., parks, food stores); have built-in scoring and analysis; and provide clear, simple feedback to users. A second "big idea" addresses dissemination of results from built environment assessments and translation into policies including land use and food access planning. Additional recommendations include (1) improving multidisciplinary collaborations; (2) engaging stakeholders across sectors; (3) centralized data resource centers; (4) increased use of emerging technologies to communicate findings; and (5) advocating for expanded funding for measurement development, training, and dissemination. CONCLUSIONS: Implementing these recommendations is likely to improve the quality of built environment measures and expand their use in research and practice.
Authors: Robin S DeWeese; Michael Todd; Allison Karpyn; Michael J Yedidia; Michelle Kennedy; Meg Bruening; Christopher M Wharton; Punam Ohri-Vachaspati Journal: Am J Health Promot Date: 2016-12-06
Authors: Ahalya Mahendra; Jane Y Polsky; Éric Robitaille; Marc Lefebvre; Tina McBrien; Leia M Minaker Journal: Health Promot Chronic Dis Prev Can Date: 2017-10 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Hannah G Lane; Hannah G Calvert; Rachel Deitch; Ryan Harris; Oyinlola T Babatunde; Lindsey Turner; Erin R Hager; Stephanie Jilcott Pitts Journal: Health Place Date: 2020-09-06 Impact factor: 4.931
Authors: Kelli L Cain; Kavita A Gavand; Terry L Conway; Carrie M Geremia; Rachel A Millstein; Lawrence D Frank; Brian E Saelens; Marc A Adams; Karen Glanz; Abby C King; James F Sallis Journal: J Transp Health Date: 2017-05-26