Literature DB >> 30580962

Unpacking walkability indices and their inherent assumptions.

Aateka Shashank1, Nadine Schuurman2.   

Abstract

Walkability indices are used to characterize the relationship between health and place. Indices make assumptions that affect analysis of the built environment and resulting walkability scores. This study compares three walkability indices created by health researchers focusing on the methods, variables, and walkability scores resulting from differences in definitions and methods. This paper deconstructs the walkability algorithms utilized by each index and rebuilds them in Vancouver, Canada. We find that neighbourhoods in the northern core closer to the downtown area have similar walkability scores across all three indices, while the outer peripheral neighbourhoods with moderate to low walkability have more variation in walkability scores across indices. Most walkability variables - residential density, street connectivity, and land-use - lack a rationale for inclusion, often assumed by researchers. Walkability indices used in health research prove to be incongruent with each other and misrepresentative of actual human behavior. We explore the impact of variable selection and methodologies on indices in the interest of more rigorous health research.
Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Built environment; Geographic information systems; Methodology; Walkability

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 30580962     DOI: 10.1016/j.healthplace.2018.12.005

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Health Place        ISSN: 1353-8292            Impact factor:   4.078


  7 in total

1.  Residential neighborhood features associated with objectively measured walking near home: Revisiting walkability using the Automatic Context Measurement Tool (ACMT).

Authors:  Stephen J Mooney; Philip M Hurvitz; Anne Vernez Moudon; Chuan Zhou; Ronit Dalmat; Brian E Saelens
Journal:  Health Place       Date:  2020-04-24       Impact factor: 4.078

2.  Walkability measures to predict the likelihood of walking in a place: A classification and regression tree analysis.

Authors:  Ronit R Dalmat; Stephen J Mooney; Philip M Hurvitz; Chuan Zhou; Anne V Moudon; Brian E Saelens
Journal:  Health Place       Date:  2021-10-23       Impact factor: 4.078

3.  Environmental Preferences and Concerns of Recreational Road Runners.

Authors:  Nadine Schuurman; Leah Rosenkrantz; Scott A Lear
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2021-06-10       Impact factor: 3.390

4.  Green Walkability and Physical Activity in UK Biobank: A Cross-Sectional Analysis of Adults in Greater London.

Authors:  Charlotte Roscoe; Charlotte Sheridan; Mariya Geneshka; Susan Hodgson; Paolo Vineis; John Gulliver; Daniela Fecht
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2022-04-02       Impact factor: 3.390

5.  Rethinking walkability and developing a conceptual definition of active living environments to guide research and practice.

Authors:  Melissa Tobin; Samantha Hajna; Kassia Orychock; Nancy Ross; Megan DeVries; Paul J Villeneuve; Lawrence D Frank; Gavin R McCormack; Rania Wasfi; Madeleine Steinmetz-Wood; Jason Gilliland; Gillian L Booth; Meghan Winters; Yan Kestens; Kevin Manaugh; Daniel Rainham; Lise Gauvin; Michael J Widener; Nazeem Muhajarine; Hui Luan; Daniel Fuller
Journal:  BMC Public Health       Date:  2022-03-07       Impact factor: 3.295

6.  Neighborhood Walkability Is Not Associated with Adults' Sedentary Behavior in the Residential Setting: Evidence from Breda, The Netherlands.

Authors:  Menno Luijkx; Marco Helbich
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2019-09-19       Impact factor: 3.390

7.  Neighborhood Walkability and Active Transportation: A Correlation Study in Leisure and Shopping Purposes.

Authors:  Eun Jung Kim; Jiyeong Kim; Hyunjung Kim
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2020-03-25       Impact factor: 3.390

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.