| Literature DB >> 33246405 |
Antonina Tcymbal1, Yolanda Demetriou2, Anne Kelso2, Laura Wolbring3, Kathrin Wunsch3, Hagen Wäsche3, Alexander Woll3, Anne K Reimers4.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Individual health behavior is related to environmental and social structures. To promote physical activity (PA) effectively, it is necessary to consider structural influences. Previous research has shown the relevance of the built environment. However, sex/gender differences have yet not been considered. The aim of this systematic review was to identify built environmental determinants of PA by taking sex/gender into account.Entities:
Keywords: Active commuting; Active transport; Built environment; Gender; Health equity; Men; Physical activity; Women
Mesh:
Year: 2020 PMID: 33246405 PMCID: PMC7697377 DOI: 10.1186/s12199-020-00915-z
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Environ Health Prev Med ISSN: 1342-078X Impact factor: 3.674
Study characteristics
| Study details | Participant characteristics (% female) | Follow-up time | Types of built environment, measurement instrument/description of intervention | PA outcome, (S—subjective measurement; | Statistical analysis | Results on associations between changes in BE and PA | Quality score | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | By gender | |||||||
| Prospective longitudinal cohort studies | ||||||||
| Boone-Heinonen et al. 2010, USA | Adolescents and young adults | 6 years | Pay and public PA facilities availability (count per 10,000 population) Street connectivity (Alpha index) Landscape diversity (Simpson’s diversity index) | Leisure time MVPA (S) | Fixed effects Poisson regression | In the whole sample landscape diversity, public facility availability, and alpha index were unrelated to MVPA. | Leisure-time MVPA bouts associated with increased public facility availability among female movers (0.053, 95% CI: 0.008, 0.097) and with pay facility availability among men (0.024, 95% CI: 0.006, 0.042, No significant gender specific effects of landscape diversity and street connectivity on leisure-time MVPA bouts. | 1 |
| Buck et al 2019, Germany, Italy, and Sweden | Children and adolescents 3–15 years old | 6 years | Movability index (land use mix, street connectivity, availability of public transport and public open spaces) | LPA and MVPA (O) | Linear mixed model | Results presented separately for genders. | In girls, the movability index showed a consistent significantly positive effect on MVPA (β = 2.14, 95% CI: (0.11; 4.16)) for all ages, and in boys, on LPA with age for each year (β = 2.68, 95% CI: (0.46; 4.90)). Availability of public open spaces was more relevant for MVPA in girls (β = 2.38, 95% CI: (0.43; 4.34)) and LPA in boys (β = 10.6, 95% CI: (4.78; 16.3)) during childhood, whereas in adolescence, intersection density (β = 3.36, 95% CI: (1.14; 5.57)) became more important for boys LPA. | 0.86 |
| Carver et al. 2010, Australia | Children 8–9 years old Adolescents 13–15 years old | 2 years | Road environment; GIS | MVPA (O) Active transport (walking cycling) (S) | Linear regression | Results presented separately for genders. | Children Boys: Change in MVPA was positively associated with the number of slow points (chicanes) in the neighborhood (β = 1.55, 95% CI = 0.25 to 2.86) (before school), the total length of locals roads (B = 3.81, 95% CI = 0.95 to 6.67) (weekends) and intersection density (B = 0.49, 95% CI = 0.14 to 0.84) (weekends). Girls: Change in MVPA was negatively associated with the intersection density (B = − 0.05, 95% CI = − 0.09 to − 0.003) and the number of traffic/pedestrian lights (B = − 0.88, 95% CI = − 1.41 to − 0.35) (evenings). Adolescents. Boys: The number of speed humps in the neighborhood was positively associated with change in MVPA after school ( Girls: Total length of local roads ( | 0.82 |
| Coogan et al. 2009, USA | Adult women | 6 years | Housing density, land use, street connectivity, traffic, public transit availability, presence of sidewalks, distance to parks; GIS | Utilitarian and exercise walking (S) | Multinomial logistic regression generalized estimating equation model | (Only females) | Increases in utilitarian walking were associated with increased housing density (OR = 2.72, 95% CI 2.22, 3.31) and bus availability (OR = 1.44, 95% CI: 1.21, 1.72). Increased housing density led to increased exercise walking (OR = 1.28, 95% CI: 1.07, 1.52) Land use, street connectivity, traffic, presence of sidewalks, and distance to parks were not associated with utilitarian or exercise walking. | 0.91 |
| Coombes et al. 2014, UK | Children 10–11 years old | 1 year | Availability of greener environments and destinations, density of the road network, school-home distance; GIS | Overall PA (O). Travel mode (S) | Multiple regression models | No significant associations between change in school commute environment or home neighborhood supportiveness and overall PA. | No gender specific effects. | 0.82 |
| Crawford et al. 2010, Australia | Children | 5 years | Destinations (PA related and school), road connectivity, traffic exposure; GIS. | MVPA (O) | Generalized estimating equation | Results presented separately for genders. | No significant associations between BE and MVPA, only the presence of dead-end roads was positively associated with MVPA in boys ( | 0.86 |
| Dowda et al. 2020, USA | Children | 3 years | Outdoor PA equipment | Number of PA days and PA location (S) | Longitudinal Poisson regression | Outside PA equipment were positive significant predictors of street PA in total sample ( | No gender specific effects. | 0.82 |
| Evenson et al. 2018, USA | Adolescents girls | 1 year | Parks availability; GIS | Park visits; MVPA in parks (O) | Wilcoxon sign rank test for two dependent samples, Pearson correlation coefficients | (Only females) | Parks were an under-used resource for adolescent girls, particularly for MVPA. Only one-fifth of the sample (20% at baseline, 19% at follow-up) visited a park at least once in six days of observation. The average duration of park visits was higher at baseline (63.9 min) compared to follow-up (38.4 min). On days when a park was visited, MVPA was higher than on days when a park was not visited. However, only 1.9% (baseline) and 2.8% (follow-up) of MVPA occurred in parks. | 0.77 |
| Hou et al. 2010, USA | Adults | 15 years | Street connectivity (intersection density, link-node ratio) , characteristic of local roads (density, proportion local relative to total road); StreetMap data, TIGER/line road classification | Overall walking, cycling, and jogging (S) | Two-part marginal effect model (probit model and an ordinary least squares regression model) | Results presented separately for genders. | Intersection density was positively associated with walking, bicycling and jogging frequencies in low urbanicity areas for both genders (men: β = 1.0; 95% CI: 0.04, 1.9, In high urbanicity areas walking, cycling and jogging frequencies in women were negatively associated with local road density (β = − 1.3; 95% CI: − 2.2, − 0.3, No significant associations between link-note ratio and PA for both genders. | 0.86 |
| Michael et al. 2010, USA | Adult men (> 65 years old) | Average 3.6 years | Availability of proximate PA resources: parks, trails, and recreational facilities; GIS | Walking (S) | Log-binomial regression | (Only males) | Proximity to recreational facilities was not associated with walking. Distances to a park and a trail were positively associated with maintaining or increasing walking between baseline and follow-up, but was not significant for the whole sample. Proximity to parks and proximity to trails, respectively, were associated with a 22% (95% CI: 1.01, 1.47) and 34% (95% CI: 1.16, 1.55) higher likelihood of maintaining or increasing walking time in high-SES neighborhoods, but there was no association in low-SES neighborhoods. | 0.77 |
| Sanders et al. 2015, Australia | Children | 8 years | Availability of green areas | Overall PA (S) | Multilevel linear regression and multilevel logistic models | Results presented separately for genders. | Boys living in areas with 10 % more neighbourhood green space had a 7 % (95% CI = 1.02, 1.13) greater odd of choosing physically active pastimes; and 7% (95% CI = 1.02; 1.12) and 9% (95% CI = 1.03; 1.15) greater odds of meeting PA guidelines on weekdays and weekends, respectively. A 10% difference in green space was associated with a mean of 1.9 min greater time spent physically active on a weekday (β = 1.88, 95% CI = 0.22, 3.53; No statistically significant results were observed for girls. | 0.91 |
| Schipperijn et al. 2015, Denmark | Young adults, | 6 years | Movability index, recreational facilities, density of daily destinations, street connectivity; GIS | Overall PA (O) | Multivariable analysis of variance | No significant associations between changes in movability index, availability in recreational facilities, density of daily destinations, street connectivity and PA for the whole sample. | Increases in mean daily total PA associated with increases in movability index (β = 10.15, 95% CI: 2.08, 18.21, Increased intersection density (street connectivity) was negatively associated with mean daily total PA in males (β = − 35.47, 95% CI: − 67.10, − 3.83, | 0.91 |
| Intervention studies | ||||||||
| Andersen et al. 2017, Denmark | Adolescents | 1 year | New urban green spaces and playgrounds were created | PA within the renovated area (O). | Linear mixed model | Post-intervention sample spent 7.8 min per day in LPA ( | No gender specific effects. | 0.77 |
| Brown and Werner 2007, USA | Adults | 1 year | New rail stop | Moderate PA bouts (O). | Ordinary least squares regression | Rail ridership was positively associated with moderate activity bouts, β = 0.39 (SE = 0.01), | No gender specific effects. | 0.77 |
| Burbidge and Goulias 2009, USA | Children and adults from 5 years old | 1 and 5 months | New trail | Overall PA, walking and biking trips (S) | A fixed-effects panel analysis regression | The new trail was associated with significant decrease in total PA (-0.245, | No gender specific effects. | 0.77 |
| Chang et al. 2017, Mexico | Adults | 3 years | Bus rapid transit and streetscape redesign (widened sidewalks, road diets, recovery of green and public space) | Walking for transport, walking for recreation, and cycling for transport (S) | Propensity score matching, cluster analysis | The average treatment effect of living in post-intervention neighbourhood on walking for transport was 24.37 min per week, on walking for transport and recreation—31.72 min, on cycling for transport—4.81 min. | Cluster analyses showed that females with low education experienced the greatest increases in PA. All of the female clusters experienced significant growth in recreational walking and transport walking except female homemakers with high education. Male clusters experienced either minimal improvements in recreational walking or decreases, but significant improvement in walking for transport (the greatest increase in male students with mid-level education). | 0.82 |
| Cohen et al. 2015, USA | 3 years | Park improvements | Park use and PA (O) | Mixed effect model and logit models | Use of the two renovated parks and PA level of users increased compared with baseline. %-change in total park use (β = 233.1, SE = 55.9, The total park use and MET-hours expended in unrenovated parks significantly decreased. | No gender specific effects. | 0.86 | |
| Cohen et al 2014, USA | N/A | 2 years | Creation of pocket parks | Park use and PA (O) Self-reported park use | Generalized estimating equation | The new pocket parks had significantly more users than comparison park playgrounds (β = − 1.21, SE = 0.28, | More females were observed at the pocket parks during follow-up than at comparison park playgrounds (63% vs. 56%, Females were somewhat less active than males in the pocket parks, with 22% engaged in MVPA vs. 29% of males ( | 0.68 |
| Cranney et al. 2016, Australia | Children and adults | 1 year | Park improvement (outdoor gym) | Park use and PA (O) | Two sample z-test | The proportion of all park users engaged in MVPA increased significantly ( The proportion of outdoor area users from all park users increased from 2.4% to 6% ( | The proportion of male park users engaged in MVPA during follow-up measurement increased on 1.9% in comparison with baseline ( The proportion of male outdoor area users from all park users during follow-up measurement increased on 1.1% in comparison with baseline ( | 0.77 |
| Dill et al. 2014, USA | Adults | 2 years | New bicycle boulevard | MVPA (O). Walking and cycling trips (S) | Binomial logit regression, negative binomial regression and linear regression models | No significant associations between installation of bicycle boulevards and increases in PA and active transportation. | Women engaged in less MVPA (ß = − 4.46, | 0.85 |
| Goodman et al. 2013, UK | Adults | 2 years | New local walking and cycling routes | Walking and cycling at new routs (S) | Longitudinal Poisson regression | After one year 32% of sample started to use new routes (29% walking, 13% cycling), after two years the proportion of users increased to 38% (35% walking, 16% cycling). | Men were more likely to use Connect2 (rate ratio 1.14 for men vs. women, | 0.91 |
| Heien et al. 2015, UK | Adults | 3 years | New transport infrastructure (busway with path for walking and cycling) | Commute mode share (active travel) (S) | Multivariable multinomial logistic regression models | Commuters living 4 km from the busway were almost twice as likely to report a substantial increase (> 30%) in their active travel mode share (relative risk ratio [RRR] 1.80, 95% confidence interval [95% CI] 1.27 to 2.55), and half as likely to report a small decrease RRR 0.47, 95 % CI 0.28 to 0.81), than those living 9 km away. Proximity to the busway also predicted a large decrease in the share of trips made entirely by car (RRR 2.09, 95 % CI 1.35, 3.21). | No gender specific effects. | 0.86 |
| Heinen et al. 2018, Australia | Adults | 4 years | New public bicycle-sharing scheme | Time spent cycling (S) | Multinomial logistic regression | On average, the respondents decreased the total time spent cycling by 1.98 minutes a week. Time spent cycling for transport decreased by 2.34 min per week, whereas the average time spent cycling or recreation increased by 0.35 min. No significant associations between proximity to a bicycle-sharing station and changes in time spent cycling. | Women, when compared to men, were less likely to increase or decrease the time spent cycling. | 0.82 |
| King et al. 2015, USA | Children and adults | 2 years | New park | Park use and PA (O) | T-test | The total number of people observed using the park post-construction significantly increased ( | The number of visitors increased for both genders. Proportion of visitors engaged only in sedentary activities decreased both in females (from 59 to 42%) and in males (from 44 to 26%). Proportion of females observed engaging in vigorous PA inside of the park boundaries increased from 0 to 20% (mostly children). Adolescent females were very under-represented within the park. Of the adolescent females counted, few were engaged in vigorous PA. On the other hand, there was a significant increase in the proportion of adolescent males observed engaging in vigorous PA ( | 0.77 |
| Ng et al. 2020, Australia | Preschoolers 2-5 years old | 6–12 months | Upgrade od childcare outdoor spaces (installation of outdoor PA equipment) | Overall PA, MVPA (O) | Multivariable linear regression | Intervention preschoolers were more active than control at follow-up (58.09 vs. 42.13 min/day increase in total PA; 30.46 vs. 19.16 min/day increase in MVPA (all | Boys were significantly more active than girls ( | 0.86 |
| Panter et al. 2017, UK | Adults | 2 years | New walking and cycling infrastructure | Walking for transport and recreation (S) | Latent class analysis and multinomial regression | Short-lived and sustained increase as well as uptake in walking for transport and recreation were associated with use of new walking and cycling infrastructure. Proximity to the intervention was associated with both uptake of and short-lived increases in walking for transport. | Increase and uptake in walking for transport or recreation were not associated with gender. | 0.82 |
| Parker et al. 2011, USA | Adults N/A | 1 year | New bike lane | Number of cyclists (O) | Negative binomial regression | The mean number of cyclists observed per day increased by 57% ( | The increase among adult female riders (133%, | 0.6 |
| Parker et al. 2013, USA | Youth and adults N/A | 1 year | New bike lane | Number of cyclists (O) | Negative binomial regression | There was an increase in cyclists on all three streets after the installation of the bike lanes [62.5 (± 28.8) vs. 110 (± 109); | The increase in cyclists was greater among females (4.69) than males (3.12). | 0.75 |
| Rissel et al. 2015, Australia | Adults | 1 year | New cycling infrastructure | Number of cyclist (O). Cycling behavior (S) | Mixed-effects logistic regression models | Bike counts at two sites on the new bicycle path reported an increase of 23 % and 97 % respectively at 12 months. Weekly frequency of cycling remained higher in the intervention (29.2–25.8% at follow-up) area than the comparison area (22.4–23.2% at follow-up) ( Among the participants in the cohort, there was no change in the self-reported weekly frequency of cycling. Only 15 % participants reported using the new bicycle path, with most users (76 %) living in the intervention area. | No gender specific effects. | 0.91 |
| Schultz et al. 2017, USA | Children and adults | 2 years | Improved access to the park | Park use and PA (S) | One-way ANCOVA model and Sidak post-hoc comparisons | Total park use increased from 2012 ( | Male park use increased from 2012 to 2013 (6.95 to 10.49) but significantly decreased from 2013 to 2014 (10.49 to 7.82); however, there was still a significant increase from 2012 to 2014 (6.95 to 7.82). Females also showed a significant increase of park use from 2012 to 2013 (7.45 to 9.78); however, unlike males, the increased use was maintained in 2014 (9.63). The total energy expenditure both for males and females in 2014 was significantly lower than in 2012. | 0.91 |
| Smith et al. 2019, Australia | Adults | 1 year | New recreational infrastructure Peninsula Aquatic and Recreation Centre (PARC) | Use of PARC, MVPA (S) | Multivariable logistic regression | After 12 months 17,5% of sample reported occasional use of PARC and 8.7% used it on regular basis. PARC users were not significantly more likely than non-users to show improvements in their level of leisure-time PA over 12 months. | Females used PARC more often (odds ratio 2.30, 95% CI: 1.37–3.87) than males. | 0.82 |
| Sun et al. 2014, China | Young adults, | 10 months (3 after intervention) | Increase in land use, street connectivity, and bus accessibility | Walking behavior (S) | Multivariable linear regression model | Intervention had positive effect on walking distance and walking ratio. An increase in pedestrian network connectivity (road intersections) positively predicted walking distance ( | No gender specific effects. | 0.82 |
| Tannis et al. 2019, USA | Adults | 1 year | Move into houses with active design (more attractive stairwells, outdoor community garden area, outdoor fitness area, community gym) | PA (S) Steps per day (O) | T-tests and Mann–Whitney | The greater daily steps increase had AD residents who moved from an elevator building ( Difference in MVPA between AD and non-AD residents was not significant. | AD building women reported more work-related MVPA overall ( AD men engaged in more moderate recreational PA ( | 0.91 |
| Tester and Baker 2009, USA | Children and adults N/A | 1 year | Park improvements (playfields) | Park use and PA (O) | Results presented separately for genders. | There were significant increases of the amount of playfield users among children and adults of both genders at the intervention parks ( There were statistically significant increases among males and females who were observed at each respective PA level (sedentary, moderate, vigorous) in the intervention parks (p<0.05). On the control playfield, only moderately active males increased. | 0.75 | |
| Wells and Yang 2008, USA | Adult women | 4 years | Moving to neo-traditional neighbourhood | Overall walking (O) | Mixed modeling | (only females) | Women who moved to places with fewer cul-de-sac, on average, walked more (5303 more steps per week, or 757 more steps per day, Increases in land-use mix were associated with less walking (31,820 fewer steps per week, or 4545 fewer steps per day), | 0.86 |
| West and Shores 2015, US | Adults | 1 year | New greenway | Walking, MVPA (S) | Ordinary least squares regressions | No significant differences between the experimental and control groups in days of walking, moderate activity, or vigorous activity before and after the greenway was constructed. | No gender specific effects. | 0.88 |
N number of participants, PA physical activity, LPA light physical activity, MVPA moderate to vigorous physical activity, AD active design
Key findings for impact of built environment on PA behavior
| Domain | BE characteristics | Physical activity (minutes, days per week, METs) | Walking, cycling (minutes, days per week, number of trips, steps per day) | Visitation or use of settings (count of users, time spent in locations) | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| All | Female | Male | All | Female | Male | All | Female | Male | ||
| Transport | New walking/cycling infrastructure | 0(1) 0(2) −-3) | +, f<m(4) +, f>m(5) +(6) +(7) +(8) 0(1) 0(2) 0(9) −-3) | +(9) +, f>m(10) +, f>m(11) | ||||||
| Street network characteristics, (street connectivity, road environment) | +(12) +(13) 0(14) 0(15) 0(16) | 0(17) | +(18) +(16) −-17) | +(19) | 0(20) | |||||
| Local road density | −-12) | −-13) | +(13) | |||||||
| Land use mix | 0(20) −-21) | |||||||||
| House density | +(20) | |||||||||
| Availability of public transport | +(22) | +,f>m(5) +(6) +(8) +(19) | +(20) | |||||||
| Landscape diversity | 0(14) | |||||||||
| Movability index | +(18) | +(17) | 0(17) | |||||||
| Distance to school and daily destinations | 0(15) 0(16) | +(17) | 0(17) | |||||||
| Recreation | Park/ green space improvement | +(23) +(24) −-25) | +(26) | +(23) +(25) +(24) | +(26) | |||||
| New parks/ green spaces | +(27) +, f<m(28) +(29) | +, f>m(28) +(29) | ||||||||
| New PA facilities | 0(30) | +, f>m(30) | ||||||||
| Availability of PA and recreation facilities and public open spaces | +(14) +(18) 0(15) 0(17) | 0(parks)(31) 0(parks)(32) | +(parks)(32) | +(33) | ||||||
| Outdoor PA equipment | +(34) +, f<m(35) | |||||||||
| Household | Houses with active design | +(36) | +(36) | |||||||
+ positive association
− negative association
0 no significant associations
f>m effect for females was greater than for males
f
1. Dill J, McNeil N, Broach J, Ma L. Bicycle boulevards and changes in physical activity and active transportation: Findings from a natural experiment. Preventive Medicine. 2014;69:S74-S8.
2. West ST, Shores KA. Does building a greenway promote physical activity among proximate residents? Journal of Physical Activity & Health. 2015;12(1):52-7.
3. Burbidge SK, Goulias KG. Evaluating the impact of neighborhood trail development on active travel behavior and overall physical activity of suburban residents. 2009. p. 78-86.
4. Goodman A, Sahlqvist S, Ogilvie D, iConnect c. Who uses new walking and cycling infrastructure and how? Longitudinal results from the UK iConnect study. Preventive medicine. 2013;57(5):518-24.
5. Chang A, Miranda-Moreno L, Cao J, Welle B. The effect of BRT implementation and streetscape redesign on physical activity: a case study of Mexico City. Transportation Research Part a-Policy and Practice. 2017;100:337-47.
6. Heinen E, Kamruzzaman M, Turrell G. The public bicycle-sharing scheme in Brisbane, Australia: evaluating the influence of its introduction on changes in time spent cycling amongst a middle- and older-age population. Journal of Transport & Health. 2018;10:56-73.
7. Panter J, Ogilvie D, iConnect C. Can environmental improvement change the population distribution of walking? Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health. 2017;71(6):528-35.
8. Heinen E, Panter J, Mackett R, Ogilvie D. Changes in mode of travel to work: a natural experimental study of new transport infrastructure. International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity. 2015;12.
9. Rissel C, Greaves S, Li Ming W, Crane M, Standen C. Use of and short-term impacts of new cycling infrastructure in inner-Sydney, Australia: a quasi-experimental design. International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition & Physical Activity. 2015;12:1-8.
10. Parker KM, Gustat J, Rice JC. Installation of bicycle lanes and increased ridership in an urban, mixed-income setting in New Orleans, Louisiana. J Phys Act Health. 2011;8 Suppl 1:S98-S102.
11. Parker KM, Rice J, Gustat J, Ruley J, Spriggs A, Johnson C. Effect of bike lane infrastructure improvements on ridership in one New Orleans neighborhood. Ann Behav Med. 2013;45(SUPPL.1):S101-S7.
12. Carver A, Timperio A, Hesketh K, Crawford D. Are safety-related features of the road environment associated with smaller declines in physical activity among youth? Journal of urban health : bulletin of the New York Academy of Medicine. 2010;87(1):29-43.
13. Hou N, Popkin BM, Jacobs DR, Jr., Song Y, Guilkey D, Lewis CE, et al. Longitudinal associations between neighborhood-level street network with walking, bicycling, and jogging: the CARDIA study. Health & place. 2010;16(6):1206-15.
14. Boone-Heinonen J, Guilkey DK, Evenson KR, Gordon-Larsen P. Residential self-selection bias in the estimation of built environment effects on physical activity between adolescence and young adulthood. The international journal of behavioral nutrition and physical activity. 2010;7:70-.
15. Coombes E, Jones A, Page A, Cooper AR. Is change in environmental supportiveness between primary and secondary school associated with a decline in children's physical activity levels? Health Place. 2014;29:171-8.
16. Crawford D, Cleland V, Timperio A, Salmon J, Andrianopoulos N, Roberts R, et al. The longitudinal influence of home and neighbourhood environments on children's body mass index and physical activity over 5 years: the CLAN study. International journal of obesity (2005). 2010;34(7):1177-87.
17. Schipperijn J, Ried-Larsen M, Nielsen MS, Holdt AF, Grøntved A, Ersbøll AK, et al. A longitudinal study of objectively measured built environment as determinant of physical activity in young adults: The European Youth Heart Study. Journal of physical activity & health. 2015;12(7):909-14.
18. Buck C, Eiben G, Lauria F, Konstabel K, Page A, Ahrens W, et al. Urban Moveability and physical activity in children: longitudinal results from the IDEFICS and I.Family cohort. The international journal of behavioral nutrition and physical activity. 2019;16(1):128-.
19. Sun G, Oreskovic NM, Lin H. How do changes to the built environment influence walking behaviors? A longitudinal study within a university campus in Hong Kong. Int J Health Geogr. 2014;13.
20. Coogan PF, White LF, Adler TJ, Hathaway KM, Palmer JR, Rosenberg L. Prospective study of urban form and physical activity in the Black Women's Health Study. American journal of epidemiology. 2009;170(9):1105-17.
21. Wells NM, Yang Y. Neighborhood design and walking. A quasi-experimental longitudinal study. American journal of preventive medicine. 2008;34(4):313-9.
22. Brown BB, Werner CM. A New Rail Stop. Tracking Moderate Physical Activity Bouts and Ridership. Am J Prev Med. 2007;33(4):306-9.
23. Cohen DA, Han B, Isacoff J, Shulaker B, Williamson S, Marsh T, et al. Impact of park renovations on park use and park-based physical activity. Journal of Physical Activity & Health. 2015;12(2):289-95.
24. Tester J, Baker R. Making the playfields even: evaluating the impact of an environmental intervention on park use and physical activity. Preventive medicine. 2009;48(4):316-20.
25. Schultz CL, Stanis SAW, Sayers SP, Thombs LA, Thomas IM. A longitudinal examination of improved access on park use and physical activity in a low-income and majority African American neighborhood park. Preventive Medicine. 2017;95:S95-S100.
26. Cranney L, Phongsavan P, Kariuki M, Stride V, Scott A, Hua M, et al. Impact of an outdoor gym on park users' physical activity: A natural experiment. Health & Place. 2016;37:26-34.
27. Andersen HB, Christiansen LB, Klinker CD, Ersbøll AK, Troelsen J, Kerr J, et al. Increases in use and activity due to urban renewal: effect of a natural experiment. American journal of preventive medicine. 2017;53(3):e81-e7.
28. Cohen DA, Marsh T, Williamson S, Han B, Derose KP, Golinelli D, et al. The potential for pocket parks to increase physical activity. American journal of health promotion : AJHP. 2014;28(3 Suppl):S19-S26.
29. King DK, Litt J, Hale J, Burniece KM, Ross C. 'The park a tree built': Evaluating how a park development project impacted where people play. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening. 2015;14(2):293-9.
30. Smith BJ, MacKenzie-Stewart R, Newton FJ, Haregu TN, Bauman A, Donovan RJ, et al. A longitudinal study examining uptake of new recreation infrastructure by inactive adults. The international journal of behavioral nutrition and physical activity. 2019;16(1):59-.
31. Evenson KR, Cho G-H, Rodríguez DA, Cohen DA. Park use and physical activity among adolescent girls at two time points. Journal of sports sciences. 2018;36(22):2544-50.
32. Sanders T, Feng X, Fahey PP, Lonsdale C, Astell-Burt T. The influence of neighbourhood green space on children's physical activity and screen time: findings from the longitudinal study of Australian children. The international journal of behavioral nutrition and physical activity. 2015;12:126-.
33. Michael YL, Perdue LA, Orwoll ES, Stefanick ML, Marshall LM, Osteoporotic Fractures in Men Study G. Physical activity resources and changes in walking in a cohort of older men. American journal of public health. 2010;100(4):654-60.
34. Dowda M, Saunders RP, Colabianchi N, Dishman RK, McIver KL, Pate RR. Longitudinal associations between psychosocial, home, and neighborhood factors and children's physical activity. Journal of physical activity & health. 2020:1-7.
35. Ng M, Rosenberg M, Thornton A, Lester L, Trost SG, Bai P, et al. The effect of upgrades to childcare outdoor spaces on preschoolers' physical activity: findings from a natural experiment. International journal of environmental research and public health. 2020;17(2):E468.
36. Tannis C, Senerat A, Garg M, Peters D, Rajupet S, Garland E. Improving physical activity among residents of affordable housing: is active design enough? International journal of environmental research and public health. 2019;16(1):151.
Fig. 1PRISMA flow-diagram of the study selection process