Brenlea Farkas1, Daniel J Wagner1, Alberto Nettel-Aguirre1,2,3, Christine Friedenreich1,4,5, Gavin R McCormack1. 1. Department of Community Health Sciences, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada. 2. Department of Pediatrics, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada. 3. Alberta Children's Hospital Research Institute, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada. 4. Department of Oncology, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada. 5. Department of Cancer Epidemiology and Prevention Research, CancerControl Alberta, Alberta Health Services, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Evidence to date suggests that the built environment has the potential to facilitate and even discourage physical activity. A limitation of previous reviews is that they have typically not been country-specific. We conducted a systematized literature review of quantitative studies that estimated associations between the built environment-which were objectively measured-and walking among Canadian adults. METHODS: Five scientific databases were searched for peer-reviewed studies published in all years up to December 31, 2016, that estimated the association between the built environment (i.e. objectively measured using audits and Geographic Information Systems [GIS]) and physical activity among a sample of Canadian adults. The database searches, title and abstract screen, full-text review and data extraction were undertaken by two reviewers. RESULTS: Of 4140 articles identified, 25 met the inclusion criteria. Most studies included data from a single Canadian province. All but two studies were cross-sectional. Most studies captured self-reported walking for transportation and walking for any purpose. Overall walkability and land use were consistently associated with walking for transportation, while proximity to destinations was associated with walking for any purpose. CONCLUSION: Our review findings suggest that the built environment is potentially important for supporting adult walking. Overall walkability, land use and proximity to destinations appear to be important given their association with transportation walking and walking for any purpose.
INTRODUCTION: Evidence to date suggests that the built environment has the potential to facilitate and even discourage physical activity. A limitation of previous reviews is that they have typically not been country-specific. We conducted a systematized literature review of quantitative studies that estimated associations between the built environment-which were objectively measured-and walking among Canadian adults. METHODS: Five scientific databases were searched for peer-reviewed studies published in all years up to December 31, 2016, that estimated the association between the built environment (i.e. objectively measured using audits and Geographic Information Systems [GIS]) and physical activity among a sample of Canadian adults. The database searches, title and abstract screen, full-text review and data extraction were undertaken by two reviewers. RESULTS: Of 4140 articles identified, 25 met the inclusion criteria. Most studies included data from a single Canadian province. All but two studies were cross-sectional. Most studies captured self-reported walking for transportation and walking for any purpose. Overall walkability and land use were consistently associated with walking for transportation, while proximity to destinations was associated with walking for any purpose. CONCLUSION: Our review findings suggest that the built environment is potentially important for supporting adult walking. Overall walkability, land use and proximity to destinations appear to be important given their association with transportation walking and walking for any purpose.
Authors: Vikram Nichani; Mohammad Javad Koohsari; Koichiro Oka; Tomoki Nakaya; Ai Shibata; Kaori Ishii; Akitomo Yasunaga; Liam Turley; Gavin R McCormack Journal: Can J Public Health Date: 2020-07-22
Authors: Gavin R McCormack; Mohammad Javad Koohsari; Jennifer E Vena; Koichiro Oka; Tomoki Nakaya; Jonathan Chapman; Ryan Martinson; Graham Matsalla Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2021-04-08 Impact factor: 4.379
Authors: Nadja Kartschmit; Robynne Sutcliffe; Mark Patrick Sheldon; Susanne Moebus; Karin Halina Greiser; Saskia Hartwig; Detlef Thürkow; Ulrike Stentzel; Neeltje van den Berg; Kathrin Wolf; Werner Maier; Annette Peters; Salman Ahmed; Corinna Köhnke; Rafael Mikolajczyk; Andreas Wienke; Alexander Kluttig; Gavin Rudge Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2020-04-28 Impact factor: 2.692
Authors: Gavin R McCormack; Mohammad Javad Koohsari; Koichiro Oka; Christine M Friedenreich; Anita Blackstaffe; Francisco Uribe Alaniz; Brenlea Farkas Journal: J Sport Health Sci Date: 2019-05-09 Impact factor: 7.179
Authors: Melanie R Keats; Yunsong Cui; Vanessa DeClercq; Scott A Grandy; Ellen Sweeney; Trevor J B Dummer Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2020-11-20 Impact factor: 3.390
Authors: Sadegh Fathi; Hassan Sajadzadeh; Faezeh Mohammadi Sheshkal; Farshid Aram; Gergo Pinter; Imre Felde; Amir Mosavi Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2020-03-31 Impact factor: 3.390
Authors: Ester Cerin; Terry L Conway; Anthony Barnett; Melody Smith; Jenny Veitch; Kelli L Cain; Ferdinand Salonna; Rodrigo S Reis; Javier Molina-García; Erica Hinckson; Wan Abdul Manan Wan Muda; Ranjit Mohan Anjana; Delfien van Dyck; Adewale L Oyeyemi; Anna Timperio; Lars Breum Christiansen; Josef Mitáš; Jorge Mota; Mika Moran; Mohammed Zakiul Islam; Robin R Mellecker; James F Sallis Journal: Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act Date: 2019-12-03 Impact factor: 6.457
Authors: Chelsea D Christie; Anna Consoli; Paul E Ronksley; Jennifer E Vena; Christine M Friedenreich; Gavin R McCormack Journal: Can J Public Health Date: 2020-08-24