| Literature DB >> 27761356 |
Thiago Hérick Sá1, Ana Clara Duran2, Marko Tainio3, Carlos Augusto Monteiro1, James Woodcock3.
Abstract
The purpose of the study was to describe cyclists and cycling trips, and to explore correlates, time trends and health consequences of cycling in São Paulo, Brazil from 1997 to 2012. Cross-sectional analysis using repeated São Paulo Household Travel Surveys (HTS). At all time periods cycling was a minority travel mode in São Paulo (1174 people with cycling trips out of 214,719 people). Poisson regressions for individual correlates were estimated using the entire 2012 HTS sample. Men were six times more likely to cycle than women. We found rates of bicycle use rising over time among the richest quartile but total cycling rates dropped from 1997 to 2012 due to decreasing rates among the poor. Harms from air pollution would negate benefits from physical activity through cycling only at 1997 air pollution levels and at very high cycling levels (≥ 9 h of cycling per day). Exposure-based road injury risk decreased between 2007 and 2012, from 0.76 to 0.56 cyclist deaths per 1000 person-hours travelled. Policies to reduce spatial segregation, measures to tackle air pollution, improvements in dedicated cycling infrastructure, and integrating the bicycle with the public transport system in neighborhoods of all income levels could make cycling safer and prevent more individuals from abandoning the cycling mode in São Paulo.Entities:
Keywords: Brazil; Cycling; Health promotion; Healthy city; Motor activity; Risk assessment; Transportation; Urban health
Year: 2016 PMID: 27761356 PMCID: PMC5067980 DOI: 10.1016/j.pmedr.2016.10.001
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Prev Med Rep ISSN: 2211-3355
Crude rates of bicyclists in the São Paulo population and adjusted prevalence ratios according to individual characteristics. São Paulo, 2012.
| Variable | Bicyclists (per 1000 residents) | 95% CI | Adj PRe | 95% CI | Pe | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sex | |||||||
| Women | 1.4 | 0.5 | 2.3 | Ref | Ref | Ref | |
| Men | 9.7 | 6.7 | 12.6 | 6.5 | 3.6 | 11.8 | > 0.001 |
| Age (years) | |||||||
| 0–18 | 3.5 | 2.1 | 5.0 | Ref | Ref | Ref | 0.005¢ |
| 19–39 | 9.1 | 6.2 | 11.9 | 6.8 | 3.5 | 13.3 | > 0.001 |
| 40–59 | 4.8 | 1.8 | 7.8 | 4.0 | 1.7 | 9.5 | 0.003 |
| ≥ 60 | 1.1 | 0.0 | 2.2 | 2.8 | 1.0 | 8.1 | 0.049 |
| Education | |||||||
| Less than high school | 4.9 | 2.4 | 7.4 | Ref | Ref | Ref | 0.402¢ |
| High school or some college | 6.1 | 4.2 | 8.0 | 0.8 | 0.4 | 1.4 | 0.376 |
| College | 4.0 | 0.9 | 7.0 | 0.7 | 0.3 | 1.9 | 0.489 |
| Quartiles of family income$ | |||||||
| Lowest Q1 (< R$ 1572) | 6.0 | 4.0 | 8.0 | Ref | Ref | Ref | 0.394¢ |
| Q2 (R$1572–R$2404) | 6.4 | 3.6 | 9.3 | 1.0 | 0.7 | 1.4 | 0.997 |
| Q3 (R$2404–R$3800) | 4.0 | 1.7 | 6.2 | 0.8 | 0.5 | 1.2 | 0.230 |
| Highest Q4 (> R$3800) | 4.3 | 2.0 | 6.5 | 0.9 | 0.4 | 1.7 | 0.665 |
| Distance to work or school ≤ 5 km | |||||||
| No | 3.9 | 1.7 | 6.1 | Ref | Ref | Ref | |
| Yes | 10.6 | 7.5 | 13.8 | 3.3 | 2.0 | 5.5 | > 0.001 |
| Car ownership⁎ | |||||||
| No | 8.3 | 5.9 | 10.7 | – | – | – | – |
| Yes | 3.2 | 1.9 | 4.5 | – | – | – | – |
| Motorcycle ownership⁎ | |||||||
| No | 5.3 | 3.7 | 6.9 | – | – | – | – |
| Yes | 6.3 | 3.1 | 9.5 | – | – | – | – |
| Car or motorcycle ownership⁎ | |||||||
| No | 8.4 | 5.9 | 10.9 | Ref | Ref | Ref | |
| Yes | 3.4 | 2.1 | 4.6 | 0.3 | 0.2 | 0.4 | > 0.001 |
| Bicycle ownership⁎ | |||||||
| No | 0.7 | 0.2 | 1.3 | Ref | Ref | Ref | |
| Yes | 15.3 | 10.8 | 19.7 | 21.1 | 9.2 | 48.6 | > 0.001 |
n = 24,534; ⁎n = 24,295. $ = As of January 2012, US$ 1.00 = R$ 1.83; e = Statistical significance if p < 0.05. ¢ = p for Wald test.
Abbreviations: 95% CI: 95% confidence interval. Adj PR: Prevalence ratio from the fully adjusted model, including sex, age, education, income, distance to work/school ≤ 5 km, car or motorcycle ownership, and bicycle ownership.
Characteristics of travel patterns among bicyclists. São Paulo, 2012 (n = 119).
| Variables (per bicyclists/day) | Mean | 95% CI | Median | IIQ (p25–p75) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total trips (n) | 2.7 | 2.5 | 2.9 | 2.0 | 2.0 | 3.0 |
| Bicycling trips (n) | 2.2 | 2.0 | 2.3 | 2.0 | 2.0 | 2.0 |
| Total travel time (min) | 75.0 | 65.8 | 84.2 | 60.0 | 30.0 | 110.0 |
| Bicycling time (min) | 52.3 | 41.4 | 63.2 | 41.0 | 26.0 | 76.0 |
| Total travel distance (km) | 10.0 | 6.8 | 13.2 | 4.8 | 2.8 | 11.5 |
| Bicycling distance (km) | 7.9 | 4.7 | 11.1 | 4.0 | 2.0 | 8.9 |
Abbreviations: 95% CI: 95% confidence interval; IIQ (p25–p75): interquartile range.
Fig. 1Crude rates of bicyclists (per 1000 residents) according to quartiles of family income. São Paulo, 1997–2012. *Statistically significant differences.
Fig. 2Tipping and break-even points for different levels of cycling (red dashed line and blue solid line, respectively) (minutes per day, x-axis) and for different background PM2.5 concentrations (y-axis). Green dotted lines represent the background PM2.5 concentrations for São Paulo (SP) in 1997, 2007 and 2012.
Fig. 3Rates of road traffic deaths (3a) and injuries (3b) for cyclists in São Paulo between 2007 and 2012.