| Literature DB >> 26621516 |
Tarun Reddy Katapally1, Daniel Rainham2, Nazeem Muhajarine3.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: In curbing physical inactivity, as behavioural interventions directed at individuals have not produced a population-level change, an ecological perspective called active living research has gained prominence. However, active living research consistently underexplores the role played by a perennial phenomenon encompassing all other environmental exposures-variation in weather. After factoring in weather variation, this study investigated the influence of diverse environmental exposures (including urban design and built environment) on the accumulation of globally recommended moderate to vigorous physical activity levels (MVPA) in children.Entities:
Keywords: EPIDEMIOLOGY; PUBLIC HEALTH; STATISTICS & RESEARCH METHODS
Mesh:
Year: 2015 PMID: 26621516 PMCID: PMC4679835 DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2015-009045
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMJ Open ISSN: 2044-6055 Impact factor: 2.692
Figure 1Urban design of Saskatoon depicting the three types of neighbourhoods (grid; fractured grid; curvilinear-green).
Hierarchical distribution of predictors
| Hierarchy | Type of measures | Examples of derived variables | Instrument |
|---|---|---|---|
| Neighbourhood level variables | Urban design | Grid-pattern | Urban Planning |
| Built environment | Diversity of destinations | Observation Tools: Neighbourhood Active Living Potential and Irvine Minnesota Inventory | |
| Neighbourhood social environment | Dwelling value | 2006 Statistics Canada Census and G5 2010 Census Projections | |
| Individual level variables | Children's perception of household, neighbourhood, peer and parental factors | Transportation support from family | Smart Cities Healthy Kids Questionnaire |
| Activity measures | Moderate to vigorous physical activity | Accelerometry |
Data obtained from built environment tools, census data and the smart cities healthy kids questionnaire were utilised to derive variables which were distributed on a numerical scale specific to each measure. Thereafter, exploration of each variable's distribution was conducted; all variables were converted into categorical variables by uniformly dichotomising each variable's scale at the 50th centile.
Figure 2Proportion of children meeting recommended physical activity guidelines.
Descriptive characteristics of the study sample depicted across urban design
| Variables | Total | Grid | Fractured grid | Curvilinear |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sampled schools | 30 | 6 | 10 | 14 |
| Total sample | 331 | 95 | 100 | 136 |
| Boys | 166 | 45 | 53 | 68 |
| Girls | 165 | 50 | 47 | 68 |
| Age 10 | 70 | 16 | 25 | 29 |
| Age 11 | 91 | 32 | 22 | 37 |
| Age 12 | 85 | 27 | 26 | 32 |
| Age 13 | 64 | 13 | 23 | 28 |
| Age 14 | 21 | 7 | 4 | 10 |
| Mean age (SD; Min,Max) | 11.6 (1.1; 10,14) | 11.6 (1.1; 10,14) | 11.5 (1.2; 10,14) | 11.63 (1.2; 10,14) |
| Mean body mass index (SD; Min,Max) | 19.9 (4; 13.4,35.9) | 19.8 (4.2; 14,35.9) | 20.3 (4.2; 13.4,34.3) | 19.7 (3.7; 14.2,33.8) |
| Mean accelerometer Wear-time/day (SD; Min,Max) | 796.3 (51.1; 653.3,930.2) | 794 (53.1; 680.8,930.2) | 797 (53.3; 653.3,915) | 797.3 (48.1; 684.5,910.6) |
| Mean MVPA/day (SD; Min,Max) | 71.2 (31.8; 8,234.5) | 72.8 (33.7; 8,178.1) | 67.3 (32.9; 13.3,234.5) | 73.1 (29.4; 16.6,182) |
| Mean SB/day (SD; Min,Max) | 540.2 (64.8; 317.4,691.3) | 537.8 (68.9; 317.4, 682.6) | 546 (70.5; 344, 691.3) | 537.3 (57; 379.7,663.4) |
| Mean LPA/day (SD; Min,Max) | 184.7 (38.9; 92.5,311.6) | 183.3 (39.1; 104.4,282.5) | 183 (40.9; 92.5,311.6) | 187 (37.4; 98 294.6) |
Accelerometer wear-time, MVPA, SB and LPA values are expressed in minutes.
LPA, light physical activity; Max, maximum; Min, minimum; MVPA, moderate to vigorous physical activity; SB, sedentary behaviour.
ANOVA testing group differences in MVPA between different types of neighbourhoods stratified by localised weather patterns
| MVPA accumulation—Warm-Wet-Calm | MVPA accumulation—Cold-Dry-Windy | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Grid | Fractured | Curvilinear | Grid | Fractured | Curvilinear | ||
| Grid | 0.00 | 3.67 | −5.46 | Grid | 0.00 | 0.00 | NA |
| Fractured | −3.67 | 0.00 | −9.13*** | Fractured | 0.00 | 0.00 | NA |
| Curvilinear | 5.46 | 9.13*** | 0.00 | Curvilinear | NA | NA | 0.00 |
| Grid | Fractured | Curvilinear | Grid | Fractured | Curvilinear | ||
| Grid | 0.00 | 3.07 | −4.41 | Grid | 0.00 | 6.31*** | 3.78 |
| Fractured | −3.07 | 0.00 | −7.49*** | Fractured | −6.31*** | 0.00 | −2.52 |
| Curvilinear | 4.41 | 7.49*** | 0.00 | Curvilinear | −3.78 | 2.52 | 0.00 |
Each value presented in the tables is a result of subtraction of group MVPA between two types of urban design (values in rows subtracted from values in columns).
***p<0.001; **p<0.01.
ANOVA, analysis of variance; MVPA, moderate to vigorous physical activity; NA, not applicable.
Multilevel logistic regression modelling factoring in weather variation to predict the influence of urban design and built environment on MVPA (mean daily MVPA dichotomised at 60 min)
| Null model | Model 1 | Model 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Variables | OR | CI | OR | CI | OR | CI |
| Intercept | 1.72 | 1.34 to 2.12 | 1.13 | 0.61 to 2.87 | 0.26 | 0.00 to 16.72 |
| Cold-Dry-Windy vs Warm-Wet-Calm | 0.58* | 0.21 to 0.84 | 0.78** | 0.01 to 0.83 | ||
| Cold-Dry-Calm vs Warm-Wet-Calm | 0.67 | 0.23 to 12.74 | 0.54 | 0.24 to 16.35 | ||
| Cold-Wet-Calm vs Warm-Wet-Calm | 0.32* | 0.16 to 0.78 | 0.44* | 0.01 to 0.92 | ||
| Boys vs girls | 1.42* | 1.27 to 4.28 | 2.06** | 1.27 to 3.33 | ||
| Age 11 vs age 10 | 0.63 | 0.28 to 9.42 | 0.82 | 0.41 to 7.63 | ||
| Age 12 vs age 10 | 0.81 | 049 to 9.75 | 0.86 | 0.43 to 9.32 | ||
| Age 13 vs age 10 | 0.42 | 0.56 to 19.42 | 0.67 | 0.32 to 22.42 | ||
| Age 14 vs age 10 | 0.50 | 0.03 to 44.77 | 0.53 | 0.12 to 36.67 | ||
| Fractured grid vs grid | 0.45** | 0.22 to 0.93 | ||||
| Curvilinear vs grid | 0.59 | 0.11 to 2.73 | ||||
| Diversity of destinations to high vs low | 2.09** | 1.14 to 3.83 | ||||
Model 1 depicts the influence of localised weather patterns (with Warm-Wet-Calm category as the reference) and as well as the influence of other individual level variables. Model 2 is the final model depicting the influence of both neighbourhood and individual level variables. Only significant results from the final model are discussed in the results.
*p<0.05; **p<0.01; ***p<0.001.95% CI.
MVPA, moderate o vigorous physical activity.