| Literature DB >> 31546780 |
Mi Namgung1, B Elizabeth Mercado Gonzalez2, Seungwoo Park3.
Abstract
This study examines the effect of the built environment on obesity in older adults, taking into consideration gender difference. In this regard, we ask two questions: (1) How does the built environment affect obesity in older adults? (2) Is there a gender difference in the effect of the built environment? To examine the research questions, this study uses the 2015 Korean National Health and Nutrition Survey and geographically weighted regression (GWR) analysis. The empirical analyses show that environmental factors have stronger effects on local obesity rates for older men than for older women, which indicates a gender difference in obesity. Based on these findings, we suggest that public health policies for obesity should consider the built environment as well as gender difference.Entities:
Keywords: Korea; built environment; gender difference; obesity; spatial analysis
Mesh:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31546780 PMCID: PMC6766019 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph16183486
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 3.390
Summary statistics of the explanatory variables.
| Variables | N | Mean | S.D. | Min | Max |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Local obesity rate for women | 217 | 25.94 | 5.96 | 9.19 | 38.82 |
| Local obesity rate for men | 217 | 21.43 | 5.13 | 11.02 | 38.71 |
| Number of fast-food per 1000 people | 217 | 0.51 | 0.27 | 0.06 | 2.35 |
| Number of sports facilities per 1000 people | 217 | 2.09 | 6.30 | 0.71 | 94.95 |
| Level of land-use mix | 217 | 0.34 | 0.16 | 0.07 | 0.76 |
| Intersection density | 217 | 52.00 | 47.48 | 0 | 298 |
| Employment density | 217 | 1615.48 | 3744.59 | 2.72 | 36,494.80 |
| Percentage of high school graduates | 217 | 24.59 | 12.63 | 7.23 | 73.73 |
| Percentage of basic living recipients | 217 | 3.73 | 1.78 | 0.68 | 9.10 |
Summary statistics of local coefficients in geographically weighted regression (GWR) for older women and men.
| Variables | Older Women | Older Men | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| OLS | GWR | OLS | GWR | |||
| Coef. (S.E.) | t-stat | Mean | Coef. (S.E.) | t-stat | Mean | |
| Intercept | 23.03*** | 11.39 | 23.914 | 17.60*** | 10.88 | 17.663 |
| Number of fast-food restaurants per 1000 people | 1.58 | 0.80 | 0.878 | 3.71** | 2.35 | 3.864 |
| Number of sports facilities per 1000 people | 0.05 | 0.77 | 0.045 | −0.11** | −2.32 | −0.110 |
| Level of land-use mix | 3.72 | 1.33 | 0.366 | 2.71 | 1.21 | 2.673 |
| Intersection density | −0.01 | −1.47 | −0.011 | 0.01 | 1.32 | 0.009 |
| Employment density | −0.00 | −0.71 | 0.000 | 0.00 | −1.28 | 0.000 |
| Percentage of high school graduates | 0.14*** | 3.54 | 0.145 | 0.13*** | 4.10 | 0.120 |
| Percentage of basic living recipients | −0.50** | −2.09 | −0.339 | −0.57*** | −2.96 | –0.574 |
| Akaike Information Criterion (AIC) | 1360.60 | 1344.95 | 1264.05 | 1263.75 | ||
|
| 0.20 | 0.35 | 0.31 | 0.35 | ||
| Adjusted | 0.17 | 0.26 | 0.28 | 0.30 | ||
| N | 217 | 217 | ||||
Summary statistics of local coefficients in GWR for older men and women.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Intercept | 23.914 | 6.17 | 14.70 | 31.56 | 16.86 |
| Number of fast-food restaurant per 1000 people | 0.878 | 4.60 | −5.63 | 9.10 | 14.73 |
| Number of sports facilities per 1000 people | 0.045 | 0.01 | 0.02 | 0.06 | 0.04 |
| Level of land-use mix | 0.366 | 2.99 | −6.21 | 6.12 | 12.33 |
| Intersection density | −0.011 | 0.01 | −0.04 | 0.00 | 0.04 |
| Employment density | 0.000 | 0.00 | −0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| Percentage of high school graduates | 0.145 | 0.08 | 0.04 | 0.26 | 0.24 |
| Percentage of basic living recipients | −0.339 | 0.22 | −0.88 | 0.14 | 1.02 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Intercept | 17.663 | 1.07 | 16.09 | 19.18 | 3.09 |
| Number of fast-food restaurant per 1000 people | 3.864 | 0.58 | 2.52 | 4.69 | 2.17 |
| Number of sports facilities per 1000 people | −0.110 | 0.01 | −0.12 | −0.10 | 0.02 |
| Level of land-use mix | 2.673 | 3.04 | −1.72 | 6.81 | 8.53 |
| Intersection density | 0.009 | 0.01 | 0.00 | 0.01 | 0.01 |
| Employment density | −0.000 | 0.00 | −0.00 | −0.00 | 0.00 |
| Percentage of high school graduates | 0.120 | 0.01 | 0.10 | 0.13 | 0.03 |
| Percentage of basic living recipients | −0.574 | 0.04 | −0.63 | −0.50 | 0.13 |
Figure 1GWR model performance for older women and men: distribution of local R2 values.
The number of localities with significant coefficients in GWR for older men and women.
| Variables | Older Women | Older Men |
|---|---|---|
| Intercept | 217 | 217 |
| Number of fast-food restaurants per 1000 people | 61 | 154 |
| Number of sports facilities per 1000 people | 0 | 217 |
| Level of land-use mix | 0 | 76 |
| Intersection density | 15 | 0 |
| Employment density | 4 | 0 |
| Percentage of high school graduates | 132 | 217 |
| Percentage of basic living recipients | 10 | 217 |
Figure 2Localities with statistically significant local coefficients in GWR.