| Literature DB >> 29357871 |
Linde Van Hecke1,2,3, Hannah Verhoeven1,2,3, Peter Clarys2, Delfien Van Dyck3,4, Nico Van de Weghe5, Tim Baert3,5, Benedicte Deforche1,2, Jelle Van Cauwenberg6,7.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Low physical activity levels and high levels of sedentary time among adolescents call for population wide interventions. Public open spaces can be important locations for adolescents' physical activity. This study aimed to describe the prevalence, frequency and context of public open space visitation and to gain insight into the individual, social and physical environmental factors associated with public open space use among 12- to 16-year-old Flemish (Belgian) adolescents.Entities:
Keywords: Global positioning device; Leisure time; Physical activity; Public spaces; Sedentary time; Youth
Mesh:
Year: 2018 PMID: 29357871 PMCID: PMC5778634 DOI: 10.1186/s12942-018-0123-2
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Health Geogr ISSN: 1476-072X Impact factor: 3.918
Fig. 1City of Ghent with location of the schools and home addresses of the participants
Fig. 2Data collection process
Fig. 3Example of a personal map
Fig. 4Data processing. GPS global positioning system, physical activity = physical activity, sedentary time = sedentary time, LPA light-intensity physical activity, MPA moderate-intensity physical activity, VPA vigorous-intensity physical activity, POS public open space
Fig. 5Sampling of the participants
Descriptive characteristics of the sample (n = 173)
| Age (mean ± SD) | 14.2 ± 1.1 |
| Gender (% girls) | 54.4 |
| Living environment (%) | |
| Rural | 6.9 |
| Sub-urban | 16.8 |
| Urban | 76.3 |
| Education (%) | |
| General | 68.8 |
| Vocational | 22.0 |
| Technical | 9.2 |
| Other ethnicity (%) | 28.3 |
| Lower SES (%) | 22.5 |
| Sport club membership (%) | 58.0 |
| Sedentary time (mean h/day ± SD) | 8.8 ± 1.6 |
| LPA (mean h/day ± SD | 3.3 ± 1.0 |
| MVPA (median min/day; Q1, Q3) | 36.5; 22.9, 51.4 |
| % of participants who used a POS | 75.1 |
| Mean number of POS visits among participants who used a POS | 1.83 ± 1.2 |
Skewed data were reported as median and interquartile range
SD standard deviation, SES socio-economic status, MVPA moderate- to vigorous-intensity physical activity, Q1 25th percentile, Q3 75th percentile, min minutes, POS public open space
Descriptive characteristics of POS visits (n = 373)
| Company (% of POS visits; multiple answers possible) | % (n = 373) |
| Friends/classmates | 59.8 |
| Siblings/cousins | 16.4 |
| Parents/grandparents | 16.4 |
| Alone | 15.6 |
| Organisation | 2.5 |
| Location (% of POS visits) | |
| Public transportation stop/station | 71.0 |
| Street | 9.4 |
| Parking lot | 5.4 |
| Square | 3.5 |
| Shopping street | 3.2 |
| Sport field/playground | 2.9 |
| Park | 2.9 |
| Shopping mall | 1.3 |
| Vacant lot | 0.3 |
| Reasons for POS visit (% of POS visits; multiple answers possible) | |
| I had to wait for something/someone here (e.g., train) | 30.3 |
| My friends/classmates/siblings/cousins wanted go there | 17.4 |
| Other (e.g., for shopping purposes, easy to meet up) | 17.4 |
| This POS is close to my home/school | 13.8 |
| I was going somewhere else and decided to stay there | 10.1 |
| It is a habit to go there | 8.3 |
| There is a nice atmosphere | 4.6 |
| My parent want me to go there/I am not allowed to go anywhere else | 4.6 |
| There is sport infrastructure available | 4.6 |
| This POS is easy accessible | 3.7 |
| I know this place for a long time and I am familiar with this POS | 1.8 |
| Activity in POS (self-reported; multiple answers possible) | |
| Standing | 43.1 |
| Walking | 38.5 |
| Sitting/lying down | 13.8 |
| Ball sports | 6.4 |
| Biking | 2.8 |
| Other | 1.8 |
| Skateboarding/BMX/roller-skating | 0.9 |
| Active games | 0.9 |
| Jogging | 0.9 |
POS public open space
Associations between individual factors and time spent in POS
| Individual factors | Logistic regressiona | Gamma modelb | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| OR | 95% CI | Exp. B | 95% CI | |
| Gender (ref = male) | 1.82 | 0.88–3.79 | 0.98 | 0.69–1.38 |
| Education (ref = general) | ||||
| Vocational | 1.09 | 0.41–2.88 | 1.42 | 0.65–3.11 |
| Technical | 8.09° | 0.97–67.62 | 1.15 | 0.61–2.15 |
| Age | 1.00 | 0.70–1.43 | 1.05 | 0.88–1.26 |
| Ethnicity (ref = Belgium) | 2.20° | 1.88–5.49 | 1.25 | 0.84–1.86 |
| Sport club membership (ref = yes) | 1.80 | 0.85–3.85 | 1.21 | 0.87–1.68 |
OR odds ratio, CI confidence interval, Exp. B exponent of B, POS public open space, ref reference category, min minutes, ° α < 0.1 = trend towards significance
aThe logistic regression model estimated the association of the independent factors with the odds of having visited a POS
bThe Gamma models (Exp. B) estimated the proportional difference in min spent in POS associated with a one-unit difference in the independent variables for adolescents that had visited a POS. Analyses were controlled for mean temperature, residence, POS visits/day, total wear time (mean min/day), and amount of days. All Gamma models were fitted using the log link function
Associations between individual and social environmental factors with sedentary time, LPA and MVPA spent in POS
| Individual factors | Gamma model sedentary time | Gamma model LPA | Gamma model MVPA | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Exp. B | 95% CI | Exp. B | 95% CI | Exp. B | 95% CI | |
| Gender (ref = male) | 0.89 | 0.63–1.27 | 0.73 | 0.53–1.00 | 0.57** | 0.41–0.80 |
| Education (ref = general) | ||||||
| Vocational | 1.43 | 0.85–2.40 | 0.71 | 0.42–1.19 | 0.74 | 0.44–1.24 |
| Technical | 1.11 | 0.62–2.00 | 0.93 | 0.51–1.67 | 0.72 | 0.40–1.29 |
| Age | 1.08 | 0.91–1.29 | 0.98 | 0.82–1.16 | 0.96 | 0.80–1.15 |
| Ethnicity (ref = Belgium) | 1.12 | 0.78–1.61 | 1.09 | 0.74–1.60 | 0.96 | 0.64–1.42 |
| Sport club membership (ref = yes) | 0.94 | 0.66–1.36 | 0.75 | 0.52–1.09 | 0.83 | 0.57–1.19 |
The Gamma models (Exp. B) estimated the proportional difference in sedentary time, LPA and MVPA in POS associated with a one-unit difference in the independent variables for adolescents that had used a POS. Analyses were controlled for mean temperature, residence, POS visits/day, total wear time (mean min/day), total time in POS and amount of days. All Gamma models were fitted using the log link function
LPA light-intensity physical activity, MVPA moderate- to vigorous-intensity physical activity, OR odds ratio, CI confidence interval, Exp. B exponent of B, POS public open space, ref reference category, min minutes, ° = α < 0.1 = trend towards significance
**α < 0.01
Associations between individual and social environmental factors with VPA in POS
| Individual factors | Logistic regressiona | Gamma modelb | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| OR | 95% CI | Exp. B | 95% CI | |
| Gender (ref = male) | 0.21** | 0.07–0.63 | 0.60* | 0.39–0.92 |
| Education (ref = general) | ||||
| Vocational | 0.70 | 0.17–2.90 | 0.59° | 0.34–1.04 |
| Technical | 0.32 | 0.07–1.52 | 1.15 | 0.48–2.75 |
| Age | 0.60° | 0.36–1.00 | 0.94 | 0.73–1.19 |
| Ethnicity (ref = Belgium) | 0.71 | 0.25–2.00 | 0.84 | 0.53–1.37 |
| Sport club membership (ref = yes) | 0.54 | 0.19–1.59 | 1.18 | 0.74–1.88 |
VPA vigorous-intensity physical activity, OR odds ratio, CI confidence interval, Exp. B exponent of B, POS public open space, ref reference category, min minutes, ° = α < 0.1 = trend towards significance
*α < 0.05; **α < 0.01
aThe logistic regression model estimated the association of the independent factors with the odds of having used a POS for VPA
bThe Gamma models (Exp. B) estimated the proportional difference in min of VPA in POS associated with a one-unit difference in the independent variables for adolescents that had used a POS. Analyses were controlled for mean temperature, residence, POS visits/day, total wear time (mean min/day), total time in POS, total time in VPA/day and amount of days. All Gamma models were fitted using the log link function